Dismissed

Mahipalsingh S/O Ramavtarsingh Thakur and Another v. Sant Gadge Baba Amravati University, through Its Registrar, Dr. Ajay P. Deshmukh

Bombay HC1 Feb 2016CP/333/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Nagpur dismissed a contempt petition filed against a university. The court held that the university did not violate the prior order mandating reservations for project affected persons, as the current recruitment was restricted to backward classes.

What did the court decide?

The contempt petition was dismissed as it was found to be without substance.

Mahipalsingh S/O Ramavtarsingh Thakur and Another Vs Sant… — Contempt of Court | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

cp333-15.odt

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR .

¶4

CONTEMPT PETITION No. 333 OF 2015 IN

¶5

WRIT PETITION No.3061 OF 2014

¶6

Mahipalsingh s/o Ramavtarsingh Thakur and another.

¶7

-Vrs.-

¶8

Sant Gadge Baba Amravati University, through its Registrar, Dr. A.P. Deshmukh.

¶9

_______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders.

¶10

Mr. S.S. Dhengale , counsel for petitioners. Mr. P.S. Patil, counsel for respondent.

¶11

CORAM : B.R. GAVAI AND P.N. DESHMUKH, JJ . DATED : 1 st FEBRUARY, 2016

¶12

The petitioner has filed this petition contending therein that the respondent University has committed contempt of the order passed by this court in W.P. No. 3061/2014 passed on 24.2.2015.

¶13

Vide the said order this court had directed the respondent University to fill in the post from the project affected persons category in view of the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Rajendra Pandurang Pangare and another Vs. State of Maharashtra and others, reported in 2009(4) Mh.L.J., 961 . It is the contention of the petitioner that in the advertisement there is no reservation provided for projected affected persons.

¶14

Shri Patil, the learned counsel appearing on behalf

¶15

2 cp333-15.odt

¶16

of the respondent University, submits that the reservation for projected affected persons would be provided as and when the vacancies are advertised from open category and he submitted that the present posts are to be filled in only from the category of backward classes.

¶17

It is not the case of the petitioners that the respondent University is making recruitment contrary to the law laid down by the larger bench of this court in the case of Rajendra Pandurang Pangare (referred supra).

¶18

In that view of the matter, we do not find that any case is made out for invoking contempt jurisdiction. The contempt petition is, therefore, without substance and as such is dismissed.

¶19

JUDGE JUDGE

¶20

Hirekhan

Mahipalsingh S/O Ramavtarsingh Thakur and Another v. Sant Gadge Baba Amravati University, through Its Registrar, Dr. Ajay P. Deshmukh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahipalsingh S/O Ramavtarsingh Thakur and Another v. Sant Gadge Baba Amravati University, through Its Registrar, Dr. Ajay P. Deshmukh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Sachee Agro Trading Pvt. Ltd., Nagpur, Rep. by Dir., Vaibhav S/O. Vikrama Parsad Chaurasia Vs the Union of India, Rep. by Sect. Dept. of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi and Others

Abdul Salik S/O Abdul Aziz Vs State of Maharahstra Thr Its Secretary Dept of Educ, Mantralaya Mumbai and Others

Shree Tatyasaheb Kore Warna Sahakari Karkhana Ltd., Warnanagar, Thr. Aut. Officer, Devidas N. Tohar Vs the Maha. Rajya Sahakari Bank Ltd., Mumbai, Thr. Authorized Officer Cum-Admin. Director and Another

Sanjay Haridas Meshram, Nagpur Vs State of Maharashtra, Settlement Commissioner and Director, Thr Secretary, Pune and Others

Gima Manufacturing Pvt. Ltd., Wardha, through Its Director Omprakash Bhikmchand Joshi and Another Vs Union of India, through Secretary Ministry of Finance (Dept. of Revenue), Govt. of India, New Delhi

Plantation Officer, Samajik Vanikaran, Akola and Anr. Vs Smt. Radhabai Wd/O Janardhal Lohakare and Anr.