A one-line order disposing of a civil application contending non-implementation of a contempt order directing an Education Officer to decide a B.Ed. post proposal within three weeks.
The Civil Application was disposed of without any further direction or order.
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 )
ca4392.18
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY cBENCH AT AURANGABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4392 OF 2018
IN CP/621/2017
SAVITA LAXMAN BHOLE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Mr.A.S. Shelke, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr.K.N. Lokhande, AGP for respondent/State.
CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA &
S.M.GAVHANE,JJ.
DATED :13.04.2018
P.C. :-
1.Mr. Shelke, learned Counsel submits that in-fact
under order dated 27.11.2017 in Contempt Petition No.621
of 2017, this Court had directed the Education Officer to
decide the proposal within three weeks and in-fact the
Contempt Petition was to be kept pending. However, it is
stated that the Contempt Petition is disposed of.
According to the learned Counsel, even within three
weeks, the Education Officer has not decided the proposal
submitted by the management for accommodating the
petitioner on B.Ed. post.
2.That would give rise to fresh contempt. The
petitioner may file fresh contempt petition, as is
permissible.
3.The Civil Application is disposed of.
[S.M.GAVHANE,J.] [S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.]
snk/2018/APR18/ ca4392.18
SAVITA LAXMAN BHOLE
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
S.V.GANGAPURWALA
S.M.GAVHANE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court