Sattappa Vishnu Patil v. The State Of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary The Dept. Of Rural And Water Conservation Dept. And ORS.

924-WP-807-2026 [Modiied].doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.807 OF 2026 Satappa Vishnu Patil & Ors.

...Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

...Respondents

------ Mr. Datta H. Pawar a/w Eshan Nayak & Sakshi Jankar, for the Petitioners. Mr. Kedar Lad a/w Poonam Dhotre, for the Respondent - Zilla Parishad, Kolhapur.

Mr. A. A. Naik, AGP, for the Respondent-State. ------ Coram: Madhav J. Jamdar & Pravin S. Patil, JJ.

Date:

March 18, 2026 P.C.:

1.

At the outset, Mr. Pawar, learned Counsel for the Petitioners, seeks leave to amend the cause title.

2.

Accordingly, leave as aforesaid is granted. Amendment to be carried out forthwith. Reveriication is dispensed with. 3.

The Petitioners herein have raised a grievance that, as per the Government Resolution dated 31st October 1989, they are entitled to get beneits of additional increment in salary. However, the same has not been revised and, therefore, they have moved a representation before Respondent No.1-Secretary, Rural Development and Water Arjun 1 of

924-WP-807-2026 [Modiied].doc Conservation Department, Mantralaya. However, Respondent No.1Secretary, Rural Development and Water Conservation Department, Mantralaya, has not taken any decision on their representation, and hence, the Petitioners seek the indulgence of this Court in the matter. 4.

In the present case, the Petitioners have restricted their prayer to the extent that the Secretary, Rural Development and Water Conservation Department, Mantralaya should decide their pending representation in a time bound manner.

5.

In view of the restricted prayer made by the Petitioners, Respondent No.1-Secretary, Rural Development and Water Conservation Department, Mantralaya is directed to decide the Petitioners' representation within a period of 4 months. 6.

It is made clear that the Petitioners shall be granted an opportunity of hearing while deciding their representation, and after granting such opportunity, the same shall be decided on its own merits. 7.

The Writ Petition stands disposed of in above terms. No order as to costs.

[Pravin S. Patil, J.] [Madhav J. Jamdar, J.] Note: This is the corrected Order as per the Speaking to the Minutes Order dated 24th March 2026. Arjun 2 of