The court disposed of a contempt petition after finding that no promotion order had been issued despite a prior restraint. Thus, no case for contempt was made out.
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.
vina k. main.sr.40.cp.139.2016.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 139 OF 2016
| Ashok Tatyaba Pardhi & ors. Vs |
… Petitioners |
|---|---|
| Mr. Pravin Dixit … |
... Respondent |
Mr. Amit Borkar for the petitioner. Ms. Nisha Mehra, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for the State.
CORAM : SHANTANU S. KEMKAR & PRAKASH D. NAIK, JJ.
DATE : 7 th DECEMBER, 2016.
P.C. :
2 . A specific query is being made that any promotion order has been issued by the respondent authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner has fairly stated that till date no order has been issued though the decision has been taken. In the order dated 8 February 2013 this court restrained the respondent only from issuing further orders of promotion. In the circumstances, no case is made out to proceed in the contempt petition. As a result, contempt petition is disposed of.
(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)
(SHANTANU S. KEMKAR, J.)
Ashok Tatyaba Pardhi
Mr. Pravin Dixit
Shantanu S. Kemkar
Prakash D. Naik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
