Disposed

Shaikh Kadir Shaikh Shammad v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Bombay HC22 Jan 2014CP/309/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this contempt petition, the petitioner urged action against the State for non-implementation of a Labour Court Award. The court held that since the State was proceeding before the Writ Court regarding the same matter, it could not be said to be disobeying the order without justifiable cause, so the petition was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Contempt Petition disposed of on the ground that the issue of non-compliance was being prosecuted before the Writ Court.

Shaikh Kadir Shaikh Shammad Vs the State of Mah and Ors. — Contempt of Court | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

cp309.12

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

CONTEMPT PETITION NO.309 OF 2012

¶6

Shaikh Kadir Shaikh Shammad,
Age-48 years, Occu:Nil,
R/o- C/o-Trade Union Centre,
Bashirganj, Beed.

¶7

...PETITIONER

¶8

 VERSUS

¶9

1) The State of Maharashtra,
 Through its Chief Secretary,
 Mantralaya, Mumbai,

¶10

2) Shri. Kadam,
 Presently working as Principal,
 Forest Training College,
 Kanhayanagar,

¶11

 Deulgaonraja Road, Jalna.

¶12

...RESPONDENTS

¶13

...

¶14

 Shri.Pradeep Shahane Advocate h/f. Shri.
 Parag P. Shahane Advocate for Petitioner.
 Shri.S.R. Palnitkar, A.G.P. for Respondents.

¶15

...

¶16

CORAM: A.I.S. CHEEMA, J.

¶17

 DATE : 22ND JANUARY, 2014

¶18

cp309.12

¶19

¶20

ORAL ORDER :

¶21

1.Counsel for Petitioner is seeking action
of contempt, as according to him the Respondents
have not complied with the Award passed by the
Labour Court, Aurangabad in Reference (IDA) No.156
of 1991, dated 27th August, 2003.

¶22

2.Learned A.G.P. submits that against the
order concerned, State has filed Writ Petition No.

¶23

9512 of 2012. The copy of the order passed on 19th
August, 2013 by the Writ Court is tendered on
record.

¶24

3.Learned counsel for Petitioner is
claiming that for long time Award is not

¶25

implemented and the Misc. Reference (IDA) No.3 of
2004 filed by the State was also rejected on 30th

¶26

November, 2011 and the Writ Petition is filed only
after this Contempt Petition was moved.

¶27

cp309.12

¶28

¶29

4.The Order dated 19th August, 2013 passed

¶30

in Writ Petition No.9512 of 2012 had stayed the
implementation of impugned order dated 27th August,
2003 till the next date and the matter was made to
stand over to 10th September, 2013.

¶31

5.The learned counsel for the Petitioner is
submitting that the Writ Court has not further
extended the time regarding non implementation of
the order dated 27th August, 2003.

¶32

6.Learned counsel for the Petitioner and
learned A.G.P., both admit that Writ Court has
issued notice and the Petitioner has entered
appearance in the Writ Petition.

¶33

7.Looking to the fact that the order

¶34

concerned of which contempt is claimed, is being

¶35

prosecuted before the Writ Court, at present it
would not be possible to say that the State is

¶36

cp309.12

¶37

¶38

disobeying the order or not complying the order
without justifiable cause. In such circumstances,
Contempt Petition is disposed of.

¶39

 [A.I.S.CHEEMA,J.]

¶40

asb/JAN14

Shaikh Kadir Shaikh Shammad v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaikh Kadir Shaikh Shammad v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dattatraya Bhagwan Barate Vs Bajrang Bhagwan Shinde and Others

Amrut Bapurao Kusale Vs Anil Ambadasrao Mahajan and Ors.

Roshanbi Rasool Tamboli and Others Vs Rajendra Ramchandra Patil and Others

Vaidhyakiya Karmachari Sanghtana Ahmednagar Zilla Ahmednagar. and Ors. Vs Rural Medical College, Thr. Its Principal Dr. S Venkataramani and Ors.

Chhagan Sonu Nikumbhe Vs Begambai Piran Naik and Ors.

Proposed Shriram Samarth Mascha Vyavasaik Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit Vs the State of Mah and Ors.