Disposed

Madhukar Vyankatrao Kulkarni v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC4 Nov 2019CP/172/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this contempt petition, the Division Bench observed that the interim order directing parties to approach the Education Officer had lost efficacy after the Education Officer subsequently passed a final order. The court held that since the dispute was adjudicated by the competent forum, there was no reason to entertain the contempt petition. The petition was disposed of without any final order.

What did the court decide?

The Contempt Petition has been disposed of as the Education Officer has already passed an order on the matter.

Madhukar Vyankatrao Kulkarni Vs the State of… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

26 CP 172 OF 2019.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CONTEMPT PETITION NO.172 OF 2019 IN

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.5168 OF 2018

¶6

( Madhukar Vyankatrao Kulkarni Vs The State of Maharashtra and others )

¶7

Shri.Ravibhushan P Adgaonkar – Advocate for Petitioner Mrs. P.V. Diggikar - A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 Shri.V.V.Bhavthankar – Advocate for Respondent Nos.3 to 5

¶8

CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE

¶9

AND

¶10

ANIL S. KILOR, JJ. DATE : 04^th November, 2019

¶11

ORDER :-

¶12

In the present Contempt Petition, our attention was invited to the order of this Court dated 21^st January, 2019 passed in Writ Petition No.5168 of 2018 and accordingly, by order dated 04^th March, 2019, simple notice was issued to respondent Nos.3, 4 and 5. In response to the notice, an affidavit-in-reply is filed on behalf of respondent Nos.3, 4 and 5.

¶13

1 of 4

¶14

26 CP 172 OF 2019.odt

¶15

On perusal of the material placed on record, certain interesting facts revealed. The petitioner approached this Court by way of Writ Petition No.5168 of 2018 with a grievance that the respondents are not abiding by the orders passed by the Education Officer dated 14^th March, 2018. It is observed by the Division Bench of this Court in order dated 21^st January, 2019 that by virtue of the order dated 14^th March, 2018, the dispute about seniority has been decided and the

¶16

transfer order passed by the respondent-Institution has been directed to be cancelled.

¶17

At this stage, learned Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.3 and 4 apprised this Court of the fact that the Appeal is already presented before the Deputy Director of Education. Considering this very fact that the proceeding was pending before the Deputy Director of Education and ultimately the Deputy Director of Education by his order remitted matter back to the Education Officer and there was no interim order passed by the Deputy Director of Education during pendency of

¶18

the proceeding, the Division Bench of this Court

¶19

2 of 4

¶20

26 CP 172 OF 2019.odt

¶21

permitted the parties to appear before the Education Officer on a particular date i.e. 04^th February, 2019 and further directed the Education Officer to take a decision afresh. The Management was directed to submit the salary bills to the Education Officer and the parties were to be bound by the order dated 14^th March, 2018 passed by the Education Officer. The Writ Petition was disposed of accordingly.

¶22

As the parties were to follow the order of Education Officer dated 14^th March, 2018 as an interim arrangement till the Education Officer passes the final order, on the background of the fact that the Education Officer subsequently passed the order on 02^nd March, 2019, which is placed on record along with the affidavit-in-reply as Exhibit R-3, we see no reason now to entertain the Contempt Petition.

¶23

Needless to state that in case if any party is aggrieved by the order dated 02^nd March, 2019 passed by the Education Officer, which is admittedly passed after the order of this Court dated 21^st January, 2019, whereby the interim arrangement was made, can certainly

¶24

3 of 4

¶25

26 CP 172 OF 2019.odt

¶26

take appropriate steps to challenge the order before the appropriate and competent forum.

¶27

At the cost of repetition, we state that an interim arrangement of this Court by order dated 21^st January, 2019 was till the decision to be taken by the Education Officer and as a fact, now the Education Officer took the decision, an interim arrangement made by this Court lost its efficacy and the parties may take appropriate steps in case they are aggrieved by the order of Education Officer. With this liberty granted to the parties and on the backdrop of the fact situation, the Contempt Petition is disposed of.

¶28

(ANIL S. KILOR, J.)

¶29

(PRASANNA B VARALE, J.)

¶30

SST

¶31

4 of 4

Madhukar Vyankatrao Kulkarni v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madhukar Vyankatrao Kulkarni 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

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajay Panditrao Nandre and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Venkat Ramchandra Kamble Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Dagubai Kisan Gaikwad and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shaikh Galib Shaikh Vahid and Others Vs Ashok Shirse and Another