← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/1219/2026disposed off

Madan S/O Sadashiv Edake And ORS. v. The State Of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary General Administration Dept. And ORS.

2026-03-18Hon'Ble Shri Justice Madhav J. Jamdar , Hon'Ble Shri Justice Pravin Sheshrao Patil3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1219 OF 2026 Madan S/o Sadashiv Edake And Ors.

...Petitioners

Versus

The State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary General Administration Dept. And Ors.

...Respondents

WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1235 OF 2026 Sunil S/o Hariba Edake And Ors.

...Petitioners

Versus

The State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary General Administration Dept. And Ors.

...Respondents

WITH WRIT PETITION (ST) NO.2198 OF 2026 Vinayak Appa Powar And Ors.

...Petitioners

Versus

The State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary General Administration Dept. And Ors.

...Respondents

.....

Adv. P. D. Dalvi a/w Adv. Tejas V. Shelake, for Petitioners. Mr. S. B. Kalel, for the Respondent-State.

Mr. Kedar Lad a/w Adv. Indrayani Patil, for the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 in all three Writ Petitions.

.....

CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR & PRAVIN S. PATIL, JJ.

DATE : 18th MARCH, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

The Writ Petition No.1235 of 2026 and Writ Petition(St) No.2198 of 2026 are not on Board. Taken on Board.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

3.

The petitioners, who are working as 'Assistant Teachers' at Zilla Parishad, Kolhapur, approached before this Court with a limited grievance that during their service tenure, they have performed the excellent work and accordingly they are entitled for the additional increment in terms of Government Resolution dated 31st December 1989.

4.

This Court in series of cases has considered this issue and directed the respective authorities to decide the individual case on its own merits.

5.

In the light of the view taken by this Court, the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the case of the petitioners be also referred to the respondent- Zilla Parishad, Kolhapur to consider their grievance.

6.

Accordingly, writ petitions are disposed of with direction to the Zilla Parishad, Kolhapur to consider the individual case of the

petitioners for additional increment as per the principles laid down under the Government Resolution dated 31st October 1989 and decide the same on its own merits as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of four months.

7.

It is clarified that this Court has not considered the merit of the matter and all contentions on merit are expressly kept open. 8.

No order as to costs.

[ PRAVIN S. PATIL, J.] [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]