Dismissed

Shri Shyamkishore S/O Ramnarayan Jaiswal and Another v. Shri. Ganeshji S/O Ramchandra Naik

Bombay HC19 Apr 2018CP/62/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a contempt petition seeking action for willful disobedience of an order dated 29.10.2013 directing the Respondents Minister to decide the Petitioners appeal. The Court accepted the Respondents statement that the delay was not deliberate since the appeal was decided favorably on 17.06.2016. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition disposed of with no order as to costs.

Shri Shyamkishore S/O Ramnarayan Jaiswal and Another Vs… — Contempt of Court | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

CP62-14

¶2

¶3

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶4

CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 62/2014 IN W.P. NO. 5897/2013 (D)

¶5

(SHYAMKISHORE RAMNARAYAN JAISWAL & ANOTHER VERSUS GANESH RAMCHANDRA NAIK, MINISTER OF STATE EXCISE & ANOTHER)

¶6

- - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶7

- - - - None for the petitioners.

¶8

Mrs. Shamsi Haidar, A.G.P. and Shri S.S. Joshi, counsel for the respondents.

¶9

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK AND MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ. DATE : APRIL 19, 2018.

¶10

By this contempt petition, the petitioners seek action against the respondents for willful disobedience of the directions in the order dated 29.10.2013.

¶11

It is the case of the petitioners that though this Court had directed the respondent no.1-the Hon'ble Minister for State Excise to decide the appeal filed by the petitioners within six weeks after hearing the petitioners, the respondents had not decided the same.

¶12

Ms Haidar, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, states that the appeal of the petitioners was decided on 17.06.2016 and certain favourable order appear to have been passed in favour of the petitioners.

¶13

In view of the statement made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, it would not be necessary to proceed with the contempt petition any further. We accept the statement made on behalf of the respondents that the delay in deciding the appeal was not deliberate and intentional. If at all the petitioners are aggrieved by the order passed by the respondents, they have other remedies but that cannot be a matter to pursue the contempt petition any further.

¶14

CP62-14

¶15

¶16

In view of the aforesaid, we dispose of the contempt petition with no order as to costs.

¶17

JUDGE JUDGE

¶18

APTE

Shri Shyamkishore S/O Ramnarayan Jaiswal and Another v. Shri. Ganeshji S/O Ramchandra Naik

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Shyamkishore S/O Ramnarayan Jaiswal and Another v. Shri. Ganeshji S/O Ramchandra Naik

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chhaya Bhaskarrao Parate (After Marriage Sau. Chhaya Ashok Bende) Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. P.S.O. Yavatmal City Dist. Yavatmal and Another

Mehmood Shah Shamim Shah Vs State of Maha. Thr. Chairman, Divisional Caste Cert. Scrutiny Committee No. 1, Amravati and Another

Atul S/O. Sahebrao @ Omkarrao Lavhale and Others Vs State of Maharashtra Thr. Assistant Police Inspector Police Station Samraspur Dist. Amravati

Nahush S/O Sanjio Dodke Vs State of Maha. Thr. Principal Secretary, Tribal Development Dept., Mumbai and Others

Dr. Rajeshree W/O. Vilas Tayde Vs State of Maharashtra Thr. Police Station Officer Police Station Ambazari Nagpur and Another

Mohd. Nadim Mohd. Sabeer and 5 Others Vs State of Maharashtra Thr. Its Secretary, General Administration Department, Mumbai and 4 Others