The Bombay High Court has rejected a former court employee’s claim for compassionate pension after his removal for theft, holding that the circumstances did not warrant special consideration under the Maharashtra pension rules.
Judge / Bench — Justices Kishore C. Sant and Jitendra Jain; judgment by Justice Jitendra Jain.
The 19 October 2026 judgment concerned Waman Shamrao Kulkarni’s claim for the period between his 1998 removal and 2004 dismissal. The court treated compassionate pension after removal as discretionary under Rule 101, rather than applying the separate prohibition concerning dismissed employees to that interval.
The employer’s reasoned refusal disclosed no unfairness or perversity. Length of service did not outweigh the disciplinary theft finding, and unexplained delay independently defeated relief. The petition was dismissed.
Advocates appearing — Petitioner — Neha B. Kamble. Respondent — Rajendraa Deshmukh, senior counsel, with Meenal S. Deshmukh, instructed by Mukul Kulkarni.