Disposed

Shri. Pradip Madhukar Petkar and Others v. Shri. Jitendra Choudhary, Project Officer, Integrated Tribal Development Project, Gondia and Anothe

Bombay HC9 Oct 2019CP/144/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, disposed of the contempt petition. The Court accepted that the impugned order was complied with for some petitioners. It ordered other petitioners were paid, dropped contempt proceedings, and directed release of grants and equal distribution of deposited funds.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings dropped; order to release salary and non-salary grants; deposited amount to be distributed equally amongst petitioners.

Shri. Pradip Madhukar Petkar and Others Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

0910cp144.18

¶2

1/2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶4

CONTEMPT PETITION NO.144 OF 2018 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1023 OF 2017

¶5

(Shri Pradip Madhukar Petkar and others vs. Shri Jitendra Choudhary and
another)

¶6

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

¶7

Shri P.N. Shende, Advocate for petitioners.
Shri S.M. Ukey, Additional Government Pleader for
respondent no.1.

¶8

Shri P.S. Chawhan, Advocate for respondent no.2.

¶9

--------
 CORAM: R.K. DESHPANDE AND
 VINAY JOSHI, JJ.
 DATED : OCTOBER 9, 2019

¶10

After the order dated 5/3/2019 passed
by this Court, revised bills were forwarded by the
Management. The petitioner no.1 was given
payment on 5/4/2019 and petitioner nos.2 and 3
were paid on 16/5/2019. Thus, according to
respondents, the said order has been complied with.
So far as other petitioners are concerned, there was
no question of submitting revised bills. Hence, the
proceedings of contempt are dropped.

¶11

The respondents shall release the salary
and non salary grants. The amount of rupees fifty
thousand deposited by the respondents be
distributed equally amongst all the petitioners.

¶12

0910cp144.18

¶13

2/2

¶14

According to respondents, there are some
recoveries from the petitioners. That question does
not fall for our consideration and respondents may
go with the process of recovery of amount in
accordance with law.

¶15

JUDGE

¶16

 JUDGE

¶17

khj

Shri. Pradip Madhukar Petkar and Others v. Shri. Jitendra Choudhary, Project Officer, Integrated Tribal Development Project, Gondia and Anothe

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Pradip Madhukar Petkar and Others v. Shri. Jitendra Choudhary, Project Officer, Integrated Tribal Development Project, Gondia and Anothe

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

Suresh S/O Gangadhar Dhirade and Another Vs the Secretary, Dept. of Irrigation, Mumbai and Others

Prashant Dwivedy S/O Prem Shankar Dwivedy Vs Reliance Smsl Limited, through Its Director, Sanjay Jog and 3 Others

Divisional Controller,Msrtc,Chandrapur Vs Smt.Kalawati Pandurang Fulzele

Kazi Aarifullah S/O Kudaratullah and Another Vs the Principal Secretary for Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai and Others

Shivkumar S/O Bakaram Khobragade Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Its Secretary, Industry Energy and Labour Dept., Mumbai and Another

Ku. Vidya D/O Sadashiv Lasurkar @ Sou. Vidya W/O Sudhir Bache Vs Zilla Parishad, Akola through Chief Executive Officer