Disposed

Prakash Ishwar Thakur v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC8 Jul 2019CP/395/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt petition regarding non-compliance with a prior writ order directing a committee to decide a validation claim, the court held that the committee had complied and the petitioner had sought further adjudication via a subsequent writ; thus, the contempt petition was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

None granted; contempt petition disposed of as nothing survives.

Prakash Ishwar Thakur Vs the State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

395.19cp

¶2

(1)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CONTEMPT PETITION NO.395 OF 2019 IN WRIT PETITION NO.12388 OF 2018

¶5

Prakash Ishwar Thakur

¶6

..PETITIONER

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

The State of Maharashtra & anr.

¶9

..RESPONDENTS

¶10

Mr D. B. Shinde, Advocate holding for Mr S. C. Yeramwar, Advocate for petitioner;

¶11

Mrs A. V. Gondhalekar, A.G.P. for respondent No.1

¶12

CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND R. G. AVACHAT, JJ. DATE : 8th July, 2019

¶13

ORAL ORDER:

¶14

By an order dated 24^th June, 2019, a simple notice was issued to respondent No.2 i.e Smt. Babita Giri, Member Secretary, Scheduled Tribe Certificates Scrutiny Committee, Nandurbar Division, Nandurbar. The grievance raised in the petition was non compliance of the order dated 1^st September, 2018, passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.12388 of 2018, whereby the respondent Scrutiny Committee was directed to decide the claim for validation within a stipulated period.

¶15

395.19cp

¶16

(2)

¶17

Learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader placed on record a communication dated 7^th July, 2019. The same is taken on record and marked 'X' for identification. Perusal of the said communication shows that though belatedly the Scrutiny Committee has decided the claim for verification, it is stated in the said letter/communication that a reasoned order dated 30^th June, 2019 is passed in the matter of petitioner whereby his claim is rejected. It is also informed that the petitioner, being aggrieved by the order of the Scrutiny Committee, has filed Writ Petition No.8251 of 2015 and the next date of admission/hearing of the said petition is scheduled on 8^th July, 2019.

¶18

The above referred facts clearly show that the order of this Court is not only complied with but the petitioner had proceeded further by approaching this Court in challenge to the order of the Scrutiny Committee. As such, nothing survives in the present contempt petition and the same is disposed of accordingly.

¶19

(R. G. AVACHAT, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.)

¶20

sjk

Prakash Ishwar Thakur v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prakash Ishwar Thakur v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

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

Mauli Sevabhavi Sanstha, Raimoha Thr President Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Chandulal Mohanlal Biyani Vs the Chief Enginer Maharashtra State Power Generation Co. Ltd. and Others

The Secretary Kamal Education Society Parbahni Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shreeram Sakharam Khandre Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Narsinh Laxmanrao Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Nilima Pandurang Pakad Vs Naresh Gitte and Another