The court accepted the respondent's unconditional apology for delay in complying with a directive and discharged the contempt notice, disposing of the petition.
Notice to respondent discharged; Contempt Petition disposed of based on unconditional apology and judicial grace.
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.
622.16CP
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CONTEMPT PETITION NO.622 OF 2016
IN WRIT PETITION NO.8027 OF 2010
...
VIJAYA ARJUNRAO JADHAV
VERSUS
LAXMAN POLE
...
Mr.P.G.Tambade, Advocate holding for Mr.Santosh S.
Jadhavar, Advocate for the petitioner
Mrs.P.V.Diggikar, AGP for the respondent/State
...
CORAM: S.S. SHINDE AND
S.M.GAVHANE, JJ.
DATE : 05.04.2018
ORDER:
1]Pursuant to the notice issued to the
respondent, the affidavit-in-reply has been filed
by the respondent. It is stated in the said
affidavit-in-reply that, fresh proposal, which was
submitted by the management, has been considered
and rejected. It is true that, the said proposal
has not been considered within six weeks as
directed by this Court, however, the respondent
has tendered unconditional apology for not
complying the said directions within stipulated
period.
622.16CP
2
2]The Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of
Suresh Chandra Poddar Vs. Dhani Ram & others1 has taken a view that even where the order of court is complied with, subsequent to receipt of notice of contempt, court should show judicial grace and magnanimity in dealing with action for contempt.
3]We accept the unconditional apology
tendered by the respondent in respect of delay in
deciding the proposal. Accordingly, the notice to
the respondent stands discharged. The Contempt
Petition stands disposed of.
4]Needless to observe that, it will be open
for the petitioner to take exception to the order
passed by the respondent whereby rejecting the
proposal for approval to the appointment of the
petitioner.
[S.M.GAVHANE] [S.S.SHINDE]
JUDGE JUDGE
DDC
1[2002] 1 SCC 766
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Suresh Chandra Poddar Vs. Dhani Ram & othersExplained¶2
Suresh Chandra Poddar Vs. Dhani Ram & others, [2002] 1 SCC 766 · Who else cites this
VIJAYA ARJUNRAO JADHAV
LAXMAN POLE
S.S. SHINDE
S.M. GAVHANE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
S.S. SHINDE and S.M. GAVHANE
Parties & counsel