DHANRAJ SHIVAJI WANI AND ORS vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THE. ITS SECRETARY RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AND ORS — WP/6101/2026

Case under The Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act,1961 Section NA. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 05th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM010214482026

Filing Number

WP/12506/2026

Filing Date

27-Apr-2026

Registration No

WP/6101/2026

Registration Date

30-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge , Hon'ble Shri Justice Hiten Shamrao Venegavkar

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge , Hon'ble Shri Justice Hiten Shamrao Venegavkar

Bench Type

Division

Category

OTHER SERVICE MATTERS ( 66 )

Sub-Category

TEACHING STAFF ( 1 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

05-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 12-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

The Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act,1961 Section NA

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.DHANRAJ SHIVAJI WANI AND ORS

    Adv. Estling S Murge,Chintamani Kamlakar Bhangoji,Chintamani Kamlakar Bhangoji, ,Chintamani Kamlakar Bhangoji

  2. 2.SHIVAJI PANDIT GUNJAL

  3. 3.DHARMENDRA MANSARAM BAGUL

  4. 4.SULOCHANA ASHOK BHAMARE

  5. 5.JAISHREE KAILAS PATIL

  6. 6.SULOCHANA ASHOK BHAMARE

  7. 7.SANJAY BABURAO JAGTAP

  8. 8.BHAGWAN YADAV KUMAWAT

  9. 9.VIJAY LAXMAN AHIRE

  10. 10.RAMESH SUKHADEO KHAIRNAR

  11. 11.SANJIV WAMAN KHAIRNAR

  12. 12.ANANT YASHWANTRAO PAWAR

  13. 13.BAPUR DASHRATH AHIRE

  14. 14.DHARMA SAYAJI NAWALE

  15. 15.BHANUDAS SUKDEV MANDLIK

  16. 16.PRAVIN MADHAVRAO GUNJAL

  17. 17.PANDHARINATH HARI BORSE

  18. 18.VILAS SHIVAJI BACHHAV

  19. 19.SUNITA PANDITRAO AHIRE

  20. 20.DODHU BUDHA THAKRE

  21. 21.KESHAV DHARMAJI SONAWANE

  22. 22.DHANAJI RAJARAM WARUNGASE

  23. 23.SURESH BABURAO PATIL

  24. 24.SHOBHA RAMJI AHER

  25. 25.SAHEBRAO DAGA SOLUNKE

  26. 26.SAHEBRAO DAGA SOLUNKE

  27. 27.RAMESH RAGHUNATH AHER

  28. 28.TUKARAM GENU KADAM

  29. 29.HIMMAT BHAGAWAN PAGAR

  30. 30.KIRAN DAMODAR WAGH

  31. 31.BHILA DHARMA BAGUL

  32. 32.UTTAM BHAGWANT NIRBHAVANE

  33. 33.POPAT SHANKAR CHAVAN

  34. 34.LAXMAN BALIRAM SAWANT

  35. 35.SUBHASH KISANRAO LOHAKARE

  36. 36.MACHHINDRANATH NIVRUTTI WAGH

  37. 37.GANGADHAR BABURAO DHATRAK

  38. 38.SHIVAJI RAJARAM KOR

  39. 39.SHARDA SARJERAO SHINGARE

  40. 40.MANGALA GANPAT DESHMUKH

  41. 41.BALU KASHIRAM GANGURDE

  42. 42.SUSHILA SADASHIV MOKASHI

  43. 43.RAMDAS MOHAN DESALE

  44. 44.HARUN SHAIKH MOHIDDIN KURESHI

  45. 45.SUSHILA SHIVAJI AHER

  46. 46.SHIVAJI EKNATH AHER

  47. 47.VIJAYKUMAR RAMCHANDRA DEORE

  48. 48.KISHOR DAULATRAO JAGDALE

  49. 49.NIVRUTTI RAMDAS JAGTAP

  50. 50.PRAKASH HARI DHESALE

  51. 51.HEMANT RAMRAO PATIL

  52. 52.RAMESH PANDURANG KHAIRNAR

  53. 53.USHA BHAGCHAND AHIRE

  54. 54.MEERABAI RAMKRISHANA NIKAM

  55. 55.PRABHAKAR MOTIRAM GOSAVI

  56. 56.MAHARU BALIRAM MANKAR

  57. 57.RAVINDRA SONU AHIRE

  58. 58.KALPANA LAXMAN HIRE

  59. 59.JIBHAU KASHIRAM JADHAV

  60. 60.SUNANDA VINAYAK THOMBARE

  61. 61.BHIMRAJ DHONDIBA GODE

  62. 62.DADAJI KISAN DHULE

  63. 63.RAJENDRA DHARMA BAGUL

  64. 64.MAYU PANDHARINATH SHINDE

  65. 65.VASANT JOBHAU PAWAR

  66. 66.DATTATRAY MURLIDHAR WARANDAL

  67. 67.SHASHIPRABHA GOVIND GHAMANDI

  68. 68.RAVINDRA BHILA KAPADNIS

  69. 69.SITARAM NARAYAN KAPADNIS

  70. 70.BALASAHEB RAMBHAU KANADE

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THE. ITS SECRETARY RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AND ORS

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 05-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge,hon'ble Shri Justice Hiten Shamrao VenegavkarView PDF

    Case Summary: WP/6101/2026 Petitioners: 261 retired pensioners (including Dhanraj Shivaji Wani, Shivaji Pandit Gunjal, and Dharmendra Mansaram Bagul) from Nashik District Respondents: State of Maharashtra (Rural Development & Finance Departments), Zilla Parishad Nashik, and Education Officer Decision: Petition partly allowed The Bombay High Court ruled that petitioners who worked for 6 months or more in the final year before retirement are entitled to annual increments that accrued on June 30th (end of the fiscal year), even though they retired after office hours. The court directed recalculation of pensionary benefits including the earned increment, with arrears payable within 90 days. However, petitioners were denied interest due to late filing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-May-2026

    Fresh Admission

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge , Hon'ble Shri Justice Hiten Shamrao Venegavkar

  4. 27-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/6101/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP/6101/2026 Petitioners: 261 retired pensioners (including Dhanraj Shivaji Wani, Shivaji Pandit Gunjal, and Dharmendra Mansaram Bagul) from Nashik District Respondents: State of Maharashtra (Rural Development & Finance Departments), Zilla Parishad Nashik, and Education Officer Decision: Petition partly allowed The Bombay High Court ruled that petitioners who worked for 6 months or more in the final year before retirement are entitled to annual increments that accrued on June 30th (end of the fiscal year), even though they retired after office hours. The court directed recalculation of pensionary benefits including the earned increment, with arrears payable within 90 days. However, petitioners were denied interest due to late filing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case