PANAJI
The High Court of Bombay at Goa has issued contempt notices to the Director of Education and two Deputy Directors over alleged non-compliance with its directions, after the petitioner, Diocesan Society of Education, pleaded that around 400 employees were being compelled to work without salaries.
The notices were issued after the Society submitted that continued non-payment of salaries amounted to clear disobedience of the High Court’s October 3, 2025 order. The Division Bench of Justice Suman Shyam and Justice Amit Jamsandekar thereafter issued notices to Director of Education Shailesh Zingade and Deputy Directors Manoj Sawaikar and Sindhu Prabhu Dessai, asking why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them. The notices are returnable on October 5.
The development comes even as the Goa government challenged the October 2025 judgment before the Supreme Court, with its Special Leave Petition listed for hearing on August 25.
During Thursday’s hearing, the government officers sought an adjournment in the contempt proceedings, citing the pendency of the SLP. The High Court, however, noted that the SC had not stayed the operation of its judgment.
“We find there is indeed an SLP pending before the SC against the judgment dated October 3, 2025, which is now fixed on August 25. However, no stay order has been passed by the SC in respect of the High Court order,” the Bench observed, stating that they are bound to proceed with the contempt proceedings in accordance with law.
The High Court also noted that the contempt matter was earlier adjourned at the respondents’ request on the ground of the proceedings pending before the SC.
The contempt proceedings arise from the October 2025 judgment, in which the High Court held that the Diocesan Society of Education, as a minority institution, was entitled to protection under Article 30(1) of the Constitution in managing and administering its educational institutions.
The then Division Bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Nivedita Mehta had held that the Society, being a linguistic minority institution, was not bound to follow procedures that restricted its right to manage and administer its institutions under Article 30(1) of the Constitution.
The Society, which oversees more than 138 schools across Goa, had challenged directives issued by the Directorate of Education requiring appointment orders to be signed by the managing committees of individual schools rather than by the Society’s chairman. The State subsequently challenged that judgment before the SC.
