Petitioner sought contempt action against the Municipal Commissioner for allegedly violating a prior Court order directing action against encroachers. The Court held that civil proceedings staying the notices precluded a finding of violation. The petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.
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.
1/1
cp85.1 3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CONTEMPT PETITION NO.85 OF 2013
Smt.Kumudini Vishwanath Athalye
-vs-
Shyam Wardhane, The Municipal Commissioner, Nagpur
Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.
Court's or Judge's Orders.
Mr.A.C.Dharmadhikari, counsel for the petitioner. Mrs.S.S.Jachak, AGP for the respondent.
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK & P. R. BORA, JJ.
DATE : 26.09.2014.
By this petition, the petitioner seeks action against the respondent for intentionally violating the order of this Court dated 14/12/2010 in Writ Petition No.63 of 2010. According to the petitioner, the respondent has not taken any action in furtherance of the notice under Section 53(1) of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 against the encroachers though this Court had specifically directed the respondent to do so.
Mrs.Jachak, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondent, states that the encroachers have challenged the notices issued by the respondent under Section 53(1) of the Act before the Civil Court and the Civil Court has stayed further proceedings in pursuance of the notices.
In view of the aforesaid, it cannot be said that the respondent has violated the order of this Court in Writ Petition 63 of 2010. The contempt petition is, therefore, disposed of with no order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
KHUNTE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the respondent violated the Court's order dated 14/12/2010 in Writ Petition No. 63 of 2010 by not proceeding against encroachers after the Civil Court stayed the notices under Section 53(1) of
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Kumudini Vishwanath Athalye
Shyam Wardhane
Vasanti A. Naik
P. R. Bora
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
