Sudarshan Chandrakant Gaikwad Died Legal Heirs Ranjana And Others vs State Of Maharashtra And Others
- Court
- Bombay High Court
2026:BHC-KOL:3186
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 10825 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Ambubai Shivaji Kamble
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2451 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Sanjay Govind Shingade
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2453 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Datta Shivram Parase
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2454 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Anand Shivram Chougule
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2455 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Iresh 1 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:27 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
Department
VERSUS
Laxman Daulat Naryankar
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2456 OF 2026
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Parvati Hanmantu Zample
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2457 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Rangnath Vitthal Waghmare
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2458 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Deepak Sham Dube
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2460 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Digamber Revan Babare
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2461 OF 2026
Iresh 2 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:27 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Subhash Dnyandeo Randive
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2462 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Kiran Manik Kadam
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2465 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Jayesh Bhimraj Ohol
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2467 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Vitthal Ambadas Mane
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2470 OF 2026
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Sushila Balu Waghmare
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2483 OF 2026
Iresh 3 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:27 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Shilpa Arvind Yampure
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2486 OF 2026
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Ujwala Mahesh Gadade
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2489 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Sainath Tipaana Rathod
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2491 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Ravikant Laxman Salunke
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2494 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Niranjan Ranusing Gorandewale
WITH
Iresh 4 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:27 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2495 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Ajit Gautam Gajdhane
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2496 OF 2026
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Kavita Mantesh Mane
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2497 OF 2026
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Laxmi Devidas Gandi
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2520 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Shrinivas Ramchandra Muglikar
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2521 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Iresh 5 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:27 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
Nagamma Vijay Vallapolu
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2523 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Radha A Gaikwad
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 29265 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Ranjana Devidas Kamble
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 29293 OF 2025
State Of Maharashtra Trhough Medical Education And Drugs
Department Mantralya
VERSUS
Nagubai Laxman Kade
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 29486 OF 2025
State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs Department
Mantralaya
VERSUS
Ranjana Krushna Pandhare
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 30245 OF 2025
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Iresh 6 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:27 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Savitra Pirappa Waghmare
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 30246 OF 2025
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department Mantralaya Mumbai
VERSUS
Mandakini Ashok Bansode
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 30282 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Tabassum Rashid Shaikh
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 30559 OF 2025
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Mumtaj Hasan Shaikh
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 30700 OF 2025
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department Mumbai
VERSUS
Rohit Satish Davankar
Iresh 7 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:27 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 30704 OF 2025
State Of Maharashtra Trhough Medical Education And Drugs
Department Mumbai
VERSUS
Sudarshan Chandrakant Gaikwad
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 30760 OF 2025
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Suhas Datta Sawant
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 30807 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Lajina Javed Pathan
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 30818 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Kumar Baburao Waghmare
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 30937 OF 2025
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Shahnaz Moosa Jamadar
Iresh 8 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:27 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 30957 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Dipali Balasaheb Gaikwad
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 31014 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Prashant Harischandra Mule
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 31026 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Chhya Kiran Ughade
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13079 OF 2025
Mandakini Ashok Bansode
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12988 OF 2025
Nagubai Laxman Kade
Iresh 9 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:27 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12989 OF 2025
Shrinivas Ramchandra Muglikar
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13001 OF 2025
Avinash Dagdu Yerwade
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12999 OF 2025
Ramesh Ambaso Mane
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12986 OF 2025
Uttam Charandas Parve
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13041 OF 2025
Iresh of 10 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:27 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
Sagar Madhukar Kamble
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13042 OF 2025
Laxmi Devidas Gandi
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13039 OF 2025
Kumar Baburao Waghmare
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13037 OF 2025
Parshuram Krushna Mane
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12984 OF 2025
Raju Motilal Maske
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12972 OF 2025
Iresh of 11 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:27 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
Datta Shivram Parase
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12968 OF 2025
Kiran Manik Kadam
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12978 OF 2025
Shri. Devidas Gorakh Pawar
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs Dept.
And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 31482 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Archana Lakula Sakhare
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 31486 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Akshay Atamaram Waghmare
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13054 OF 2025
Iresh of 12 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:27 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
Sainath Tipanna Rathod
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13029 OF 2025
Digamber Revan Babare
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13031 OF 2025
Subhash Dnyandeo Randive
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13003 OF 2025
Archana Lakula Sakhare
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12992 OF 2025
Vimal Santosh Gujare
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13010 OF 2025
Iresh of 13 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:27 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
Sanjay Govind Shingade
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13005 OF 2025
Mumtaj Hasan Shaikh
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13009 OF 2025
Shilpa Arvind Yampure
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13012 OF 2025
Shahnaz Moosa Jamadar
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13006 OF 2025
Somnath Basappa Takalge
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
Iresh of 14 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:27 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
WRIT PETITION NO. 13008 OF 2025
Sachin Tanaji Pawar
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13015 OF 2025
Ravikumar Jayasingh Kaiyyawale
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13018 OF 2025
Suhas Datta Sawant
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13019 OF 2025
Anand Shivram Chougule
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13021 OF 2025
Ravikant Laxman Salunke
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
Iresh of 15 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:27 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13007 OF 2025
Sujit Balu Kamble
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13044 OF 2025
Smt. Shobha Vilas Nikambe
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 793 OF 2026
Pirappa Shripati Vhankade Died Lrs Rekha Pirappa Vhankade And
Others
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 792 OF 2026
Sudarshan Chandrakant Gaikwad Died Legal Heirs Ranjana And
Others
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2471 OF 2026
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education Drugs
Department Mantralaya
Iresh of 16 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:27 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
VERSUS
Somnath Basappa Takalge
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2472 OF 2026
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Amol Shivaji Prakshale
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 30242 OF 2025
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Tushar Dhananjay Chandanshive
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 30980 OF 2025
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Ravikumar Jayasingh Kaiyyawale
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12987 OF 2025
Jayshree Santosh Talbhadare
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12985 OF 2025
Iresh of 17 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:27 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
Ashok Munkanna Zample
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13013 OF 2025
Tabassum Rashid Shaikh
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13060 OF 2025
Savitra Pirappa Waghmare
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13016 OF 2025
Lajina Javad Pathan
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2378 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Jayshree Santosh Talbhandare
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2534 OF 2026
Iresh of 18 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:27 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Educatin And Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Shrinivas Yogesh Channa
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2536 OF 2026
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Ratnabai Shrishail Khairate
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12994 OF 2025
Parvati Hanmantu Zample
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12976 OF 2025
Devdas Madayya Gudshellu
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12973 OF 2025
Ujwala Mahesh Gadade
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13047 OF 2025
Iresh of 19 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:27 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
Mangesh Govardhan Zombade
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13022 OF 2025
Nagamma Vijay Vallapolu
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13046 OF 2025
Shrinivas Yogesh Channa
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13045 OF 2025
Smt. Ranjana Devidas Kamble
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13043 OF 2025
Vishal Hariba Gaikwad
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
Iresh of 20 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:27 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13025 OF 2025
Smt. Ranjana Krushna Pandhare
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13026 OF 2025
Akash Dipak Prakshale
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13027 OF 2025
Avinash Bharat Ghotikar
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13030 OF 2025
Sunil Hanmantu Vallapolu
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
Iresh of 21 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13002 OF 2025
Jayshri Kiran Shinde
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13033 OF 2025
Sangita Vaibhav Kadam
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13020 OF 2025
Pradip Revansiddha Koli
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 31012 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Petras Dawid Channapagolu
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13034 OF 2025
Ambubai Shivaji Kambale
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
Iresh of 22 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13038 OF 2025
Shrikant Jeevan Boledul
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 31477 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Vishal Hariba Gaikwad
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 31481 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Pradnya Jagnnath Kamble
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 31483 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Shridevi Anil Waghmare
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 31484 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Iresh of 23 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
Department
VERSUS
Pirappa Shripati Vhankade
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13052 OF 2025
Smt. Laxmi Sidram Mhetre
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13051 OF 2025
Smt. Dipali Balasaheb Gaikwad
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13050 OF 2025
Smt. Archana Appasaheb Somavanse
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13023 OF 2025
Jayesh Bhimraj Ohol
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
Iresh of 24 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13000 OF 2025
Deepak Sham Dube
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12998 OF 2025
Radha Arjun Gaikwad
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13049 OF 2025
Pradnya Jagnnath Kamble
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2537 OF 2026
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Mainabai Baliram Dolare
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12991 OF 2025
Chandrakala Gurunath Chavan
Iresh of 25 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12996 OF 2025
Kavita Mantesh Mane
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13004 OF 2025
Nilesh Ramchandra Aabute
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2515 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Mangesh Govardhan Zombade
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2517 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Yasin Mehboob Shaikh
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2518 OF 2026
Iresh of 26 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Chandrakala Gurunath Chavan
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2528 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Vimal Santosh Gujare
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2531 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Parshuram Krushna Mane
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 30305 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department Mantalaya
VERSUS
Sunil Hanmantu Vallapolu
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 30430 OF 2025
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Avinash Bharat Ghotikar
Iresh of 27 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 30560 OF 2025
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Nilesh Ramchandra Aabute
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 30599 OF 2025
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Shrikant Jeevan Boledul
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 30699 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Sujit Balu Kamble
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 31011 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Devdas Madayya Gudshellu
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12967 OF 2025
Iresh of 28 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
Sushila Balu Waghmare
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12965 OF 2025
Vithal Ambadas Mane
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13053 OF 2025
Mainabai Baliram Dolare
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13011 OF 2025
Amol Shivaji Prakshale
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2446 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Yallappa Jagdev Waghmode
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2447 OF 2026
Iresh of 29 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Laxmi Sidram Mhetre
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2473 OF 2026
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Sangita Vaibhav Kadam
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2474 OF 2026
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Anilkumar Kallappa Turabe
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2476 OF 2026
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Ashok Munkanna Zample
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2477 OF 2026
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Akash Dipak Prakshale
WITH
Iresh of 30 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2478 OF 2026
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Siddharam Shetappa Bhanage
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2479 OF 2026
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Atish Khajappa Gajadhane
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2480 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Devidas Gorakh Pawar
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2481 OF 2026
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Archana Appasaheb Somavanse
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2492 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Rajkumar Amogsiddh Narute
Iresh of 31 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2493 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Pradip Revansiddha Koli
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2525 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Jayshri Kiran Shinde
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2527 OF 2026
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs Dept
Mantralaya
VERSUS
Ambika Dattatray Kumar
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2532 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Sachin Tanaji Pawar
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2533 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Iresh of 32 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
Prashant Tanaji Gade
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2535 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Ramesh Ambadas Mane
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12993 OF 2025
Laxman Daulat Naryankar
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12995 OF 2025
Rajkumar Amogsiddh Narute
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 30675 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Khairunissa Sayyad Pathan
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 30698 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Iresh of 33 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
Department
VERSUS
Narsing Narsappa Vitevolu
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13040 OF 2025
Tushar Dhananjay Chandanshive
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13036 OF 2025
Atish Khajappa Gajadhane
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12981 OF 2025
Yallappa Jagdev Waghmode
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12983 OF 2025
Shridevi Anil Waghmare
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12990 OF 2025
Rohit Satish Davankar
Iresh of 34 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12997 OF 2025
Prasahant Harishchandra Mule
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12979 OF 2025
Savitri Suresh Koli
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12982 OF 2025
Petras Dawis Channapagolu
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12977 OF 2025
Akshay Atamaram Waghmare
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13035 OF 2025
Narsing Narsappa Vitevolu
Iresh of 35 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12960 OF 2025
Khairunissa Sayyad Pathan
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12975 OF 2025
Vishal Sidram Maindargikar
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12964 OF 2025
Jyoti Ganesh Shinge
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12963 OF 2025
Yasin Mehboob Shaikh
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs Dept.
And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 31474 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs
Department
Iresh of 36 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
VERSUS
Shobha Vilas Nikambe
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13024 OF 2025
Laxmi Sanjeev Mhaisker
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13032 OF 2025
Chhaya Kiran Ughade
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13014 OF 2025
Ratnabai Shrishail Khairate
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12974 OF 2025
Niranjan Ranusing Gorandewale
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12966 OF 2025
Ajit Gautam Gajdhane
Iresh of 37 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12961 OF 2025
Anilkumar Kallappa Turabe
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12962 OF 2025
Ambika Dattatray Kumar
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13048 OF 2025
Siddharam Shetappa Bhanage
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13028 OF 2025
Rangnath Vitthal Waghmare
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13017 OF 2025
Prashant Tanaji Gade
VERSUS
Iresh of 38 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
State Of Maharashtra Thr. Medical Education And Drugs
Department And Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 28988 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Avinash Dagadu Yerwade
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 29186 OF 2025
The State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Vishal Sidram Maindargikar
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 29473 OF 2025
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Savitri Suresh Koli
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2418 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Jyoti Ganesh Shinge
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2444 OF 2026
Iresh of 39 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Sagar Madhukar Kamble
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2445 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department
VERSUS
Raju Motilal Maske
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2448 OF 2026
State Of Maharashtra Through Medical Education And Drugs
Department Mantralaya
VERSUS
Laxmi Sanjeev Mhaisker
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 2449 OF 2026
State Of Maharashtra Medical Education And Drugs Department
VERSUS
Uttam Charandas Parve
Mr. M. S. Topkar a/w Mr. Daniel Dhanawade, Mr. Mark Dhanawade,
Ms. Bhargavi Patil, Mr. Neev Patil for Petitioners in the Petitions filed
by the employees and for Respondents in the petitions filed by the
State.
Mr. Siddheshwar B. Kalel AGP for the Petitioner-State in the
petitions filed by the State and for the respondent-State in the
petitions filed by the employees.
CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.
th
DATE : 10 APRIL, 2026.
Iresh of 40 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
JUDGMENT:
1. These petitions, presented under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India, raise an exception to the orders rendered by
the Industrial Court in individual complaints. While the employees
challenge these orders to the extent that they were denied the
primary relief of regularisation although positive findings of fact.
The State/employer has filed its own set of petitions to challenge
the grant of even the limited relief directed by the Industrial Court
namely, the forwarding of the employees' names for administrative
approval against vacant posts.
2.
Since all these writ petitions involve a common question of
law and arise out of similar sets of facts and findings, are heard
together and disposed of by this common judgment. For the purpose
of adjudication, Writ Petition No. 13034 of 2025 (arising out of
Complaint (ULP) No. 84 of 2018) as the lead petition.
3. The employees in these petitions were engaged by the State
at Dr. Vaishampayan Memorial Government Medical College and
Shri Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Sarvopachar Rugnalay, Solapur—
in Class IV positions. The lead Petitioner was engaged as a daily
Iresh of 41 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
wage worker on 16 August 2010. The record reflects that
approximately 120 similarly situated employees were engaged in a
similar fashion. Having rendered continuous and uninterrupted
service for over a decade, these employees were kept on daily
wages, were below the statutory minimum, and were denied the
benefits of permanency.
4. It is a matter of record that within the Respondent’s
establishment, there exist 383 sanctioned posts for the Class IV
category. It is the specific case of the employees that over 100 of
these posts have remained vacant for years. Although the
availability of sanctioned vacancies and a Government Resolution
dated 17 May 2019 directing the recruitment of 100% of these
posts, the State chose to continue the employees on daily-wage
basis.
5. Aggrieved by this continued uncertainty, the employees
approached the Industrial Court, Solapur, invoking Items 5, 6, 9,
and 10 of Schedule IV of The Maharashtra Recognition of Trade
Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971
(Hereinafter referred as ‘the said Act’). Employees alleged that the
State had engaged in an unfair labour practice while continuing
Iresh of 42 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
them on a temporary basis for years with the object of depriving
them of the status and privileges of permanent employees.
6. The State resisted these complaints, primarily on the
ground that the appointments were purely on daily-wage
engagements based on oral instructions and did not follow regular
recruitment procedures. However, the State did not successfully
displace the evidence regarding the longevity of service or the
existence of sanctioned vacant posts.
7. Upon evaluating the oral and documentary evidence, the
Industrial Court rendered the orders under challenge (in the lead
case, on 19 December 2024). The Court recorded a finding of fact
that the employees had completed continuous service for more than
decade and that sanctioned vacant posts were available. However,
instead of granting the substantive relief of regularisation, the Court
directed the Employer to forward proposals for 'approval' to the
State Government, a direction which the employees contend is to
leave the employees at the mercy of the State Government and
contrary to the legitimate entitlement of employees and which the
State challenges even in its limited form.
Iresh of 43 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
8. In the backdrop of the aforesaid facts, Learned Counsel for the
Petitioner-employees, while supporting the factual findings of the
Industrial Court, submits that the Court failed to exercise its
jurisdiction to grant the consequential relief of regularisation. It is
argued that once the positive finding was recorded regarding the
employees' entitlement based on long and continuous service
(exceeding 240 days in each calendar year), the Industrial Court
was not justified in restricting the relief to a mere direction to
forward proposals for approval.
9. It is further submitted that the existence of sanctioned
vacant posts is admitted by the Respondents themselves during the
proceedings while issuing an advertisement for recruitment of
inasmuch as 153 posts. Consequently, the Petitioner contends that
any further administrative process or 'approval' is entirely redundant
and serves only to delay the inevitable grant of permanency. The
Petitioner asserts that the availability of these sanctioned vacancies,
coupled with the clear mandate of the Government Resolution dated
17 May 2019 to fill 100% of vacant Class IV posts, establishes
legitimate right in favor of the employees which cannot be deferred
and in any event defeated by administrative laxities.
Iresh of 44 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
10. The Petitioner argues that continuing the employees on a
daily-wage basis for over a decade, while denying them the
statutory benefits and job security associated with permanent
employment, constitutes a unfair labour practice under Items 6, 9,
and 10 of Schedule IV of the said Act. Reliance is placed on settled
legal principles to contend that such prolonged temporary
engagement of workers against perennial needs is an exploitation of
labour that warrants immediate judicial intervention.
11. Finally, the Petitioner brings to the notice of this Court that
during the pendency of these proceedings, and despite the Industrial
Court’s findings, the Respondents issued a fresh recruitment
advertisement for the very posts currently occupied by these
employees. It is submitted the action is not only contrary to the
judicial findings but is a an attempt to displace the Petitioner and
render the entire adjudication redundant. In light of these
submissions, the Petitioner prays that the impugned orders deserves
to be modified conferring direct and effective regularisation from
the date of entitlement.
12. In process, learned Counsel for the Petitioner-employees have
relied upon the following judgments:
Iresh of 45 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
1 2
Jaggo Vs. Union of India , Dharam Singh and Ors Vs. State of UP
3
and Bhola Nath Vs. State of Jharkhand
13. Per Contra, Learned Counsel appearing for the State and its
authorities (the Petitioners in the cross-petitions) vehemently
opposes the claim for regularisation and challenges the very legality
of the Industrial Court’s findings. It is primarily contended that the
employees were engaged purely on a temporary, daily-wage basis
without adhering to the constitutional scheme of public
employment. The State submits that these appointments were made
through oral instructions without advertisement or selection
process, and consequently, such 'back-door entries' do not confer
any legal right upon the employees to seek permanency or
regularisation.
14. It is further submitted that the Industrial Court committed a
grave error while concluding mere completion of 240 days of service
ipso facto entitles an employee to permanency. It is further
contended that regularisation is not an axiomatic consequence of
long service, especially when the initial entry was not in conformity
1
2024 SCC Online SC 3826
2
2025 SCC Online SC 1735
3
2026 INSC 99
Iresh of 46 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
with the recruitment rules. The State challenges the finding of
'unfair labour practice' under Items 6, 9, and 10 of Schedule IV of
the said Act, asserting that such a finding is perverse and
unsupported by the evidence on record, as no promise of
permanency was ever extended to these daily-wage workers.
15. Regarding the directions issued by the Industrial Court, the
State contends that regularisation is a matter of policy and
administrative discretion. It is submitted that the Court cannot
bypass the mandatory requirement of obtaining previous approval
from the competent Government bodies. The State maintains that
the direction to forward a proposal for 'approval' is a necessary
procedural safeguard to ensure compliance with financial and
administrative norms, and the Industrial Court could not have
directed the State to regularise services in absence of due process.
16. Lastly, the State justifies its action of issuing a fresh
recruitment advertisement, contending that it is duty-bound to fill
sanctioned vacant posts through a competitive and merit-based
process. It is submitted that seeking to fill these vacancies through
advertisement is in line with the principles of equality in public
employment, and the employees are free to participate in such a
Iresh of 47 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
process alongside other eligible candidates. The State, therefore,
prays for the quashing of the impugned orders and the dismissal of
the employees' claims in their entirety.
17. In support of the submissions, learned AGP relied upon the
Judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Secretary, State of
4
Karnataka v. Umadevi .
18. Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties and having
perused the record, the following issues arise for consideration:
(i) Whether the Industrial Court, after recording a
categorical finding of fact that the employees had rendered
long and continuous service against available sanctioned
vacant posts, was justified in restricting the relief to a
direction to 'forward a proposal for approval' instead of
granting regularisation?
(ii) Whether the State can be permitted to defeat the
claims of the employees, who have been found to be
victims of unfair labour practices, by initiating a fresh
recruitment process for the same posts during the
pendency of these proceedings?
4
(2006) 4 SCC 1
Iresh of 48 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
(iii) Whether the findings of the Industrial Court regarding
the existence of unfair labour practices and the entitlement
of the employees to benefits of permanency suffer from
any perversity or error of law warranting interference
under the writ jurisdiction?
19. At the outset, it is necessary to examine the findings of fact
recorded by the Industrial Court. Perusal of the impugned orders
reveals a consistent finding in all matters that the employees have
rendered long, continuous, and uninterrupted service for a period
exceeding 15 years, and there exist clear vacancies against
sanctioned posts within the establishment of the Respondent-
Medical College. These findings are based on appreciation of the
oral and documentary evidence adduced and admitted by litigating
sides.
20. The existence of 383 sanctioned posts, with at least 145
posts lying vacant, is a matter of record and is admitted. Once these
foundational facts are established namely, the perennial nature of
the work, the availability of sanctioned vacancies, and the length of
service rendered for more than decade, the 'unfair labour practice'
on the part of the State in continuing these employees on a daily-
Iresh of 49 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
wage basis is completely unjust.
21. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bhola Nath (supra)
underscored the constitutional imperative of the State’s action or
lack thereof, in failing to recognise the continuous service of
employees for regularisation. Such inaction was found to be
inherently arbitrary and violative of the mandate of Article 14 of the
Constitution of India. The Apex Court reaffirmed that the State, as a
"model employer," is saddled with a heightened obligation to act
with probity, fairness, and candour. It bears a social responsibility to
preserve the dignity of its workforce and is strictly prohibited from
exploiting the vulnerability, helplessness, or unequal bargaining
position of its employees.
22. The Apex Court further examined the engagement of the
employees on the anvil of fundamental rights and the doctrine of
waiver. Although the initial appointments were temporary and
governed by annual extensions, the fact remains that these
extensions persisted for over 15 years. The Apex Court observed
that such a prolonged period of temporary service creates a
legitimate expectation of permanence. Consequently, the State’s
refusal to grant regularisation was regarded as an arbitrary exercise
Iresh of 50 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
of power warranting judicial interference. The Apex Court reiterated
that Article 14 casts a non-negotiable obligation upon the State to
treat all persons equally, and these fundamental rights, by their very
nature, are incapable of being waived by the individual.
23. Furthermore, the Court held that where State action is in
violation of Article 14, the mere fact that an engagement is
governed by contractual terms cannot be construed as a waiver of
fundamental rights. The "contractual" label does not provide a
shield for the State to bypass constitutional protections. By
addressing the limits on perpetual contractual engagements, the
Apex Court effectively endorsed the entitlement of employees who
have dedicated more than a decade of service to the State, holding
that the State cannot indefinitely keep employees in a state of
precariousness.
24. Once the fact of continuous service and available vacancies is
established, the conduct of the State must be tested against the
standards expected of a Model Employer. The State is not a private
employer driven by profit motives; it is a Welfare State bound by the
constitutional mandate of fairness, probity, and social responsibility
under Article 14 of the Constitution. As a Model Employer, it is
Iresh of 51 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
under an obligation to ensure that its employment practices are free
from arbitrariness and exploitation.
25. In the present case, the State’s action in keeping Class-IV
employees, who perform essential services in a medical hospital, on
a precarious daily-wage basis for over 15 years is a clear departure
from these constitutional obligations. It is unconscionable for the
State to weaponize its domineering position to take advantage of
the helplessness and weak bargaining power of its workers. Such a
'culture of adhocism,' where employees are kept in a state of
perpetual uncertainty despite the perennial nature of their work,
cannot be countenanced in a society governed by the Rule of Law.
26. The obligation of a Model Employer is to maintain and uphold
the Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation. Where employees have been
permitted to discharge their duties against sanctioned posts for a
considerable and substantial length of time; in this case, more than
a decade and a half, it is obvious that a legitimate expectation of
claim for permanency would spring into action. By consistently
granting extensions and retaining their services year after year, the
State effectively prevented these individuals from seeking
alternative livelihoods, reposing a confidence that their dedication
Iresh of 52 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
would receive formal recognition.
27. At this juncture, it is worthwhile to take note of Class-IV
employees who are backbone of hospital operations. Without their
dedication, functioning of the hospital would be paralyzed since it is
hygiene which will suffer, patients’ care also will be reduced and the
medical staff in the process would be over burdened. Therefore,
recognizing and respecting their duties and role is essential for
proper functioning of the healthcare system. As such, it is
indispensable one. Though, these employees work behind scene,
their contribution facilitates patients’ safety, hospital efficiency and
overall healthcare services.
28. Confronted with the same, learned AGP has fairly accepted
the indispensable role of these employees. As such, the exploitative
approach adopted by the State has to be regarded as arbitrary and
violative of constitutional mandate and keeping them for decades on
temporary basis is certainly questionable act and does not suit the
welfare State as a model employer and which cannot be driven by
profits and culture of adhocism.
29. Furthermore, there are, legal vis-a-vis moral limits to
perpetual contractual engagement. The State cannot be permitted to
Iresh of 53 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
continue adhocism indefinitely, as doing so has the direct effect of
impairing the dignity and legitimate entitlements of the employees.
It must be recognized that these employees are not mere 'ancillary'
help; they are essential components of the medical college’s
machinery. The apathy displayed by the State in ignoring their 15
years of service is not only unpalatable but stands in direct
contravention of the obligation of a Welfare State
30. Such insensitive approach of the State is further evidenced by
the issuance of a fresh recruitment advertisement in October 2025
for 153 Class-IV posts. It is startling that while this Court is seized
with the issue of these employees' entitlements, claims already
upheld by the Industrial Court, the State has chosen to precipitate
the matter attempting to fill these very posts through an external
process. It is aimed at defeating the adjudicated rights of long-
serving employees and rendering the judicial decisions redundant is
highly improper. Instead of bolstering the claims of those who have
dedicated over 15 years to the institution, the State has acted with a
sense of impunity that this Court finds necessary to deprecate this
approach of State in the strongest terms.
31. Furthermore, the State’s reliance on the communication dated
Iresh of 54 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
10 April 2026 to deny regularisation is entirely misplaced. In this
communication, the Under Secretary sought to justify the denial by
citing a lack of sanctioned posts and invoking the restrictive
principles in the case of Umadevi (Supra) . However, such a stand is
factually and legally unsustainable, in the dint of verdict of Apex
Court in case of Bholanath (Supra) .
32. Recently cautioned by the Apex Court in Shripad (Supra) and
Vinod Kumar (Supra) , the decision in Umadevi cannot be used as a
shield to perpetuate the exploitative engagement of temporary
employees for decades. Where the State has failed to undertake
regular recruitment for decades while continuing to utilize and
exploit the services of the same individuals against perennial needs,
it cannot now be permitted to take shelter under the guise of
procedural irregularities to defeat their legitimate claims, unless
illegality is demonstrated.
33.
The findings rendered by the Industrial Court regarding long
service and the existence of sanctioned posts are based on evidence
and do not suffer from any perversity. On the contrary, once the
Industrial Court found that the employees were victims of unfair
labour practices, it ought to have granted the relief ensuring
Iresh of 55 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
affirmative action directing regularisation. The approach of granting
a conditional direction to 'forward names for approval' will relegate
the employees at the mercy of the State.
34. In view of the detailed analysis and findings recorded above,
my answers to the issues framed are as follows:
(i) The Industrial Court was not justified in restricting relief
to a mere proposal. Once the facts of long service and
vacant posts were established, the Court was duty-bound to
grant the substantive relief of regularisation to prevent the
continued exploitation of the employees.
(ii) The State, as a Model Employer, is prohibited from
weaponizing its recruitment powers to displace employees
whose rights to permanency have already been judicially
recognized.
(iii) The factual findings of the Industrial Court regarding
the existence of unfair labour practices are legally sound
and based on evidence. However, the limited relief granted
by the Industrial Court was an error of law that warrants
interference and modification by this Court.
Iresh of 56 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::
WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc
35. In view of the aforesaid findings, communication dated
10/04/2026 issued by the State is unsustainable in law and shall
not be acted upon.
36.
Consequently, the Writ Petitions preferred by the employees
deserve to be allowed, while the Writ Petitions filed by the
State/Employer deserve to be dismissed.
37. Hence, the following order
O R D E R
(i) The Writ Petitions presented by the employees as
indicated in the cause title are Allowed.
(ii) The Writ Petitions presented by the State/Employer
as indicated in the cause title are Dismissed.
(iii) The impugned orders passed by the Industrial
Court are modified and it is hereby directed that the
said employees shall be regularised in service against
available vacant sanctioned posts with all
consequential _ benefits.
iv) The State/Employer shall implement these
directions within a period of eight (8) weeks from the
date of this judgment.
(v) Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No order
IRESH
MASHAL
as to costs.
Digitally signed
by IRESH
MASHAL
Date:
2026.04.24
20:58:45
+0530
[SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.]
Iresh of 57 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 21:47:28 :::