Bombay High Court
WP/1186/2023 of DEVENDRA S/O SUKHDEO WALTHARE AND OTHERS Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THR. SECRETARY, DEPT. OF SPORTS AND EDUCATION, MUMBAI AND OTHERS on 12 October 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF
9-WP-1186-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 1186/2023
DEVENDRA S/O SUKHDEO WALTHARE AND OTHERS
VS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Varun Mankar h/f. Mr. S.D. Chande, Advocate for the Petitioner (s).
Mr. N.R. Patil, AGP, for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
Mr. A.Y. Kapgate, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4.
Mr. Shivba Dighade h/f. Mr. Anand Parchure, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 5 to 20.
CORAM :
ANIL L. PANSARE AND NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, JJ.
DATE :
OCTOBER 12, 2026.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard.
2. The argument is that the issue involved is covered by the judgment in the case of Ganesh Mahadeo Asekar & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. (Writ Petition No. 5563 of 2022), decided on 08.05.2026.
3. Mr. N.R. Patil, learned AGP appearing for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2, and Mr. A.Y. Kapgate, learned counsel appearing for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4–Zilla Parishad, submit that the judgment referred to in the above order has been challenged before the Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Diary) No. 56133/2026. He further submits that the petition is likely to be listed in near future.
4. We are informed that the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ganesh Mahadeo Asekar & Ors. (supra) has held that clause 3 of the Government Circular dated 13.10.2016, issued by the State of Maharashtra, is discriminatory in nature and, accordingly, the same has been quashed. Kartikeya 2026:BHC-NAG:13628-DB
9-WP-1186-2023
5. If such is the situation, unless the judgment in Ganesh Mahadeo Asekar & Ors. (supra) is stayed or set aside by the Supreme Court, the parties will be bound by the law as declared in the aforesaid case.
6. With the aforesaid clarification, the petition is disposed of. (JUDGE) (JUDGE) Kartikeya