Disposed

Dharma Kondiba Thorat v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC22 Mar 2018CP/81/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A contempt petition regarding alleged non-compliance with an order for release of benefits is disposed of. The Court directs the respondents to take necessary steps by 15th May 2018, averting the need to keep the petition pending, while leaving all contentions open.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to do the needful latest by 15th May 2018. Contempt petition disposed of.

Dharma Kondiba Thorat Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others — Contempt of Court | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

903-cp-81-06

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 81 OF 2006

¶3

Dharma K. Thorat ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and ors. ...Respondents

¶4

Mr. Ramdas P. Sabban for the Petitioner. Mr. N.C. Walimbe, AGP for the Respondents.

¶5

CORAM : SMT. V. K. TAHILRAMANI, Acting C.J. & M. S. SONAK, J.

¶6

DATE : 22^nd MARCH 2018.

¶7

P.C.

¶8

1] Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶9

2] Mr. N.C.Walimbe, learned AGP places on record communication dated 26^th February 2018 addressed by the Under Secretary, Government of Maharashtra to Mr.Ramdas Sabban, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The said communication is taken on record and marked as “X” for purposes of identification.

¶10

3] In the aforesaid communication, it is clearly stated that necessary proposal for release of benefits, in terms of the order of which contempt is alleged, have been

¶11

D.S.Sherla

¶12

903-cp-81-06

¶13

forwarded to the Finance Department. Mr. Walimbe submits that necessary decision will be taken within a period of eight weeks from today.

¶14

4] Taking into consideration the aforesaid

¶15

communication, we do not deem it appropriate to keep the present contempt petition pending. We, however, direct the respondents to do the needful latest by 15^th May 2018. Mr. Sabban points out that since there is a delay in compliance, interest may be awarded. In a contempt petition, we are afraid that we will not be in a position to consider the request for such substantive relief. However, if, any grievance of the petitioner survives, then, the petitioner will be at liberty to take out appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum for redressal of such grievance. However, we make it clear that we have not gone into this issue and therefore, all contentions of all parties are left open.

¶16

5] With the aforesaid observations, this contempt petition is disposed of.

¶17

(M.S. SONAK, J.)

¶18

(ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶19

D.S.Sherla page 2 of 2

Dharma Kondiba Thorat v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharma Kondiba Thorat v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Wilson Benjamin Castellino Vs the State of Maharashtra

Amit Deepak Waghmare Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shri. Shivsji Krishnat Mo and Ors.Te Vs the State of Maharashtra. and Ors.

Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalalya Sangathan and Ors. Vs Smt.Lata Thakkar and Ors.

Umesh Kishor Goradia Vs the State of Maharashtra

Santram Dnyanoba Khade Vs the Superintendent of Police Vishrambaug and Anr.