Bombay High Court slams former Chief Justice's special officer for misusing his name in trust appointments matter

The Bombay High Court has quashed an administrative directive issued by the former Chief Justice's special officer that had halted the appointment of trustees to Shree Saptashrung Nivasini Devi Trust in Nashik [Vishnu Trimbak Warungase & Ors v. State of Maharashtra & Ors].

A Division Bench of Justices GS Kulkarni and Neela Gokhale held that the officer, Anju Shende, acted with ‘gross impropriety’, without lawful authority and misused the name of the Chief Justice.

The controversy arose after Shende sent an email to the Nashik Principal District and Sessions Judge on March 14, 2026, ordering the immediate withdrawal of a recommended list of five trustees finalised on March 12 following an interview process.

Shende claimed the directive followed oral instructions from the then Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar regarding a newly promulgated state ordinance.

The participants in the selection process for trustee appointment approached the court challenging the communication.

During the hearing, the counsel representing the High Court administration and the district judge conceded that no official submission or proposal had ever been placed before the Chief Justice.

“The impugned communication as issued, being attributed to the Hon'ble the Chief Justice, is not supported by the record with the registry," the bench noted.

The Court expressed disbelief at the directive and observed,

“We wonder as to what could have prompted the special officer to the Hon'ble the Chief Justice/respondent no. 4, to issue such communication purportedly under the garb of having acted as per the directions of the then Hon'ble the Chief Justice on the administrative side.”

The Court firmly rejected the officer's defence and went to the extent of stating that she misused the name of the Chief Justice of the High Court.

“In fact, in our view, it is a clear case where the special officer to the Hon'ble the Chief Justice/respondent no. 4 has misused the name of the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court in issuing the impugned communication, for reasons which are not coming forth on record.”

The bench warned that working within the secretariat provides no immunity.

“Such conduct, in our opinion, apart from being gross also possibly amounts to a serious misconduct on the part of respondent no. 4 in issuing the impugned communication... merely working with the Secretariat of the Hon'ble the Chief Justice would not mean that there is licence to indulge in issuance of such illegal communication.”

The High Court accordingly quashed the communication along with the Nashik District Judge’s consequential stay order.

Senior Advocate AY Sakhare with advocates Rameshwar Gite, Pravin Thorat and Tejaswini Pathave appeared for the petitioners.

Advocate General Milind Sathe along with Government Pleader NS Bhide and Additional Government Pleaders OA Chandurkar and GR Raghuwanshi appeared for the State.

Senior Advocate Sharan Jagtiani and advocates RS Datar and Nikhil Adkine appeared for respondents.