HC issues non-bailable warrant against ex-chief secretary Sujata Saunik for refusing contempt notice

The employees had approached the court after being denied the benefit, despite the state’s policy allowing it. While the government later issued a Government Resolution (GR) on August 24, 2017, to address such cases, the court clarified that the GR would apply only prospectively, not to increments granted before its issuance

MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Wednesday issued a non-bailable warrant against retired Maharashtra chief secretary Sujata Saunik after she refused to accept a contempt notice and allegedly prevented a court bailiff from pasting it outside her residence.

Mumbai, India - June 30, 2025: Ex chief secretary of Maharashtra Sujata Saunik at Mantralaya, in Mumbai, India, on Monday, June 30, 2025. (Photo by Anshuman Poyrekar/ Hindustan Times) (Hindustan Times)

A division bench of justices Ravindra Ghuge and Ashwin Bhobe had earlier issued a contempt notice to Saunik for failing to comply with a November 27, 2020 order directing the General Administration Department (GAD) to revise the pay scales of over a dozen employees of the Pune Zilla Parishad. The order required the government to consider three advance increments granted to the employees while fixing their Sixth Pay Commission salaries.

The employees had approached the court after being denied the benefit, despite the state’s policy allowing it. While the government later issued a Government Resolution (GR) on August 24, 2017, to address such cases, the court clarified that the GR would apply only prospectively, not to increments granted before its issuance.

In 2022, one of the employees filed a contempt petition against four officials, including Saunik, then Additional Chief Secretary (GAD). The court later dropped two names but noted that Saunik and another bureaucrat, Rajesh Kumar, were responsible for implementing its order.

Although the state’s counsel assured compliance, the court said the matter could be closed if both officers tendered formal apologies. Kumar later filed an affidavit expressing unconditional apology and attributing the delay to “administrative reasons.”

Saunik, however, sent a subordinate, V Radha, to the court to tender an apology on her behalf on June 12 this year — an act that angered the bench. “Prima facie, we find Respondent No 1 (Saunik) does not desire to tender an apology and instead has directed a subordinate bureaucrat to file an affidavit. This attitude cannot be countenanced,” the court observed, and directed issuance of a contempt notice.

The situation escalated when, after retiring on June 30, Saunik refused to accept the notice delivered to her residence on July 4, telling the bailiff she was no longer in government service. “The bailiff’s report clearly mentions that Saunik refused to accept the notice, declined to acknowledge service, and obstructed affixing of the notice at her premises,” the court noted.

The bench has now issued a non-bailable warrant to secure Saunik’s presence before it on November 26.

Additionally, the court has ordered disciplinary action against a section officer of the High Court registry, Aditya P Satghare, for delaying the issuance of the contempt notice—allegedly to allow Saunik to retire—and sought a compliance report by January 15, 2026.