High Court of Bombay Bench at Aurangabad disposed of a pending contempt petition on the ground that nothing survived in it, directing any aggrieved intervenor to assail orders in appropriate proceedings.
Contempt petition disposed of holding that nothing survives.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CONT. PETITION NO. 247 OF 2012 IN WP/3077/2011
RAMESH VITHALRAO KULKARNI VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAH AND ORS
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. S.R. Barlinge AGP for Respondents 2-4 : Smt. M.S.Patni Advocate for Respondent 5 : Mr. P.R.Patil
CORAM : S V GANGAPURWALA & V.K. JADHAV, JJ. Dated: November 25, 2014
PER COURT :-
Mr. Patil learned counsel submits that present contempt petition is not tenable as the order of which the contempt is alleged is passed in a petition filed by an association. Mr. Barlinge learned counsel submits that contempt is purged in as much as they have already passed order and nothing remains in the present contempt petition.
This Court had not passed any order in the contempt petition, since the year 2012 it is pending.
If theintervenor is aggrieved by any order passed by the respondent state, the intervenor will have to assail the said order in an appropriate proceeding, however, as nothing survives in the present contempt petition, same is disposed of.
( V.K. JADHAV, J. ) ( S V GANGAPURWALA, J. )
aaa/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the present contempt petition is tenable given the pending cognate proceedings and the intervenor's standing.
Ramesh Vithalrao Kulkarni
The State of Maha nd Ors
S V Gangapurwala
V.K. Jadhav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
