In two contempt petitions, the court observed that the petitioners' salaries had been deposited in their accounts due to subsequent developments. Finding no necessity to proceed, the court disposed of both contempt petitions without any further orders.
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.
cp281.13.6.14.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
CONTEMPT PETITION NO.281/2013 IN WRIT PETITION NO.636/2013 (D)
Smt. Chitralekha Nitin Naidu ..vs.. Dr. Rajendra Prakashe, Secretary, Adarsha Dyan Prakash Shikshan Sanstha Nagpur and anr.
AND
CONTEMPT PETITION NO.6/2014 IN WRIT PETITION NO.635/2013 (D)
Ravindra Kavduji Natkar ..vs.. Dr. Rajendra Prakashe, Secretary, Adarsha Dyan Prakash Shikshan Sanstha Nagpur and anr.
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders
Court's or Judge's orders
Mr. P. N. Shende, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. H. D. Dangre, Advocate for respondent no.1. Mr. Y. B. Mandpe, Advocate for respondent no2.
CORAM : B. R. GAVAI & V. M. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : DECEMBER 7, 2016
In view of the subsequent developments i.e. salary of the present petitioners being deposited in their accounts, we do not find it necessary to proceed further with the contempt proceedings.
The contempt petitions stand disposed of.
JUDGE JUDGE
kahale
Chitralekha Nitin Naidu
Ravindra Kavduji Natkar
Dr. Rajendra Prakashe
Adarsha Dyan Prakash Shikshan Sanstha Nagpur
B. R. Gavai
V. M. Deshpande
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
