Bombay High Court
The State Of Maharashtra Medical ... vs Nagamma Vijay Vallapolu on 10 April, 2026
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 - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 10 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 11 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 12 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 13 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 14 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 15 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 16 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 17 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 18 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 19 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 20 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 21 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 22 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 23 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 24 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 25 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 26 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 27 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 28 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 29 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 30 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 31 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 32 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 33 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 34 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 35 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 36 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 37 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 38 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 39 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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.
DATE : 10th APRIL, 2026.
Iresh 40 of 57
::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 :::
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 41 of 57 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 ::: 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 42 of 57 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 ::: 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 43 of 57 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 ::: 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 44 of 57 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 ::: 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 45 of 57 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 ::: WP-10825 OF 2025 and ors.doc Jaggo Vs. Union of India1, Dharam Singh and Ors Vs. State of UP 2 and Bhola Nath Vs. State of Jharkhand3
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 46 of 57 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:52 ::: 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 47 of 57 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:53 ::: 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 Karnataka v. Umadevi4.
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 48 of 57 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:53 ::: 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 49 of 57 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:53 ::: 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 50 of 57 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:53 ::: 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 51 of 57 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:53 ::: 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 52 of 57 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:53 ::: 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 53 of 57 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:53 ::: 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 54 of 57 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:53 ::: 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 55 of 57 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:53 ::: 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 56 of 57 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:53 ::: 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 ORDER
(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.
IRESH (v) Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No order MASHAL Digitally signed as to costs.
by IRESH MASHAL Date: 2026.04.24 20:58:45 +0530 [SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.] Iresh 57 of 57 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 22:43:53 :::