Laxmi Wd/O Manohar Ragade v. State Of Mah., Thr. Principal Secy., Dept. Of Public Health, Mantralaya Mumbai And ORS.
2026:BHC-NAG:4219-DB 112 WP-2146-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO.2146 OF 2026 [Smt. Laxmi Wd/o Manohar Ragade ..vs.. State of Maharashtra and Others] ______________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order and Registrar's orders.
Ms D. R. Anandani, Advocate for Petitioner.
Shri. P. P. Pendke, AGP for Respondents/State. CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR AND RAJ D. WAKODE, JJ.
DATE : 12 th MARCH, 2026 .
.
Heard Ms. D. R. Anandani, Advocate for Petitioner. 2.
The contention is that the petitioner is the legally wedded wife of Shri. Manohar Ragade, who was working with respondent No.4. According to the petitioner, the marriage was solemnized on 13.05.1980 and they were blessed with three children. The aforesaid fact is revealed from the nomination form, which is at record page No.18 (Annexure - 4), where the name of the petitioner alongwith her three children has been recorded as the name of family members of Ragade. 3.
However, the aforesaid nomination form also reveals that the name of the present petitioner has been struck out and the name of Anita has been added. In view of such alteration, after the death of the aforesaid employee, respondent No.5 - Anita Ragade, has received the retiral benefits so also the pensionary benefits being the wife of the deceased employee. The petitioner has raised various complaints regarding the aforesaid disbursement of retiral benefits so also pension to respondent No.5.
112 WP-2146-2026 4.
A perusal of the petition reveals that there are several communications issued by respondent No.4 regarding the aforesaid complaints raised by the petitioner. However, they are not being taken to any logical end. The last such complaint is at record page No.62, which was submitted by the petitioner on 15.10.2025. Ms. D. Anandani, learned counsel for petitioner, submits that even after passage of five months now, such complaint has not yet decided by respondent No.4. 5.
In view of the above, we dispose of the present writ petition with a direction to respondent No.4 to decide the grievance raised by the petitioner regarding the disbursement of the retiral and pensionary benefits to respondent No.5 erroneously and more particularly in the light of the last representation dated 15.10.2025, within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of the order of this Court. The decision taken shall be communicated to the petitioner within a period of two weeks thereafter.
6.
The present writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. (RAJ D. WAKODE, J.) (ANIL S. KILOR, J.) TAMBE Signed by: Mr. Ashish Tambe Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 13/03/2026 10:40:19