Disposed

Narayan Indarrao Chavan v. Vikas Shankar Kharge and Others

Bombay HC3 Jan 2020CP/552/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a contempt petition where the Court observed displeasure at the officers' informal method of submitting a Government Resolution. The Court directed the Chief Conservator of Forest to ensure proper implementation of the Court's order and the Government Resolution.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was thereupon given notice to comply with the order of this Court and the Government Resolution dated 18th November, 2019.

Narayan Indarrao Chavan Vs Vikas Shankar Kharge and Others — Contempt of Court | Bombay HC (2020)

¶1

( 1 )

¶2

552.19cp

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 552 OF 2019 IN

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.14871 OF 2017

¶6

Narayan S/o Inderrao Chavan Age 63 Years, Occu.Retired, R/o Dharur, Tq.Dharur District Beed.

¶7

PETITIONER

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Shri Vikas S/o Shankar Kharge Age:Major, Occu:Service, As Principal Secretary, (Forest) Revenue and Forest Department Maharashtra State, Mantralaya, Mumbai-400032

¶10

Shri U.K.Agrawal, Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, (Van Bal Pramukh) Maharashtra State, Van Bhavan, Ramgiri Road, Civil Line, Nagpur

¶11

Shri Prakash Kerba Mahajan Age Major, Occu.Service, As Chief Conservator of Forest (Territorial) Aurangabad Division, Van Bhavan, Opp.S.S.C. Board, Osmanpura, Aurangabad.

¶12

Shri Amol Rambhau Satpute, Age: Major, Occu.Service As Divisional Forest Officer,

¶13

( 2 )

¶14

552.19cp

¶15

Khas Bag, Lendi Raod, Beed, District Beed.

¶16

RESPONDENTS

¶17

Mr A.S.Shelke, Advocate for the petitioner; Mr S.B.Yawalkar, A.G.P. for respondent No. 4;

¶18

CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE & ANIL S. KILOR, JJ.

¶19

DATED : 3rd JANUARY, 2020

¶20

ORAL ORDER:

¶21

Heard Mr Shelke, learned Counsel for petitioner.

¶22

In response to the notice issued by this Court

¶23

to respondent Nos. 3 and 4 by order dated 20^th August, 2019, the learned A.G.P. invited our attention to the Government Resolution/Notification dated 18^th November, 2019.

¶24

Perusal of the above referred notification shows

¶25

that the State Government approved the claim of the petitioner in consonance with the order of this Court. Mr Shelke, learned Counsel for petitioner was justified in making the submission before this Court that, even though

¶26

( 3 ) 552.19cp

¶27

the State Government had decided to grant the benefits to the petitioner, unless and until the necessary orders are not issued by the competent authority, the petitioner may not receive the actual benefits granted to him under the orders of this Court. Thus, it was the submission of Mr Shelke, learned Counsel that the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 be further directed to give effect to the Government Resolution dated 18^th November, 2019 by following due procedure.

¶28

As the notice is already issued to respondent Nos. 3 and 4, we deem it appropriate to direct respondent No. 3 to take all necessary steps at the earliest so as to see the real compliance of the order of this Court as well as the compliance of the Government Resolution dated 18^th November, 2019.

¶29

Before parting, we may record our dis-pleasure

¶30

for the course adopted by the senior Government officials i.e. respondent Nos.3 and 4. Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 are

¶31

occupying the position as Chief Conservator of Forest (Territorial), Aurangabad and Divisional Forest Officer,Beed. Being senior officer of the Government, it was expected of respondent No.3 to establish proper contact with the office of the Government Pleader, in case, respondent No.3 was desirous of being represented through learned A.G.P. in the matter and then to file short affidavit with the Government Resolution dated 18^th November, 2019. Respondent No.3 has chosen a course of deputing Law Officer to approach the office of Government Pleader and drop the copy of the Government Resolution dated 18^th November, 2019, in this Court. It can certainly be expected of senior officers of the State Government to be aware of seriousness of the contempt proceedings.

¶32

We hope and trust that henceforth, this Court is not faced with such an unpleasant situation.

¶33

( 5 ) 552.19cp

¶34

With these observations, the contempt petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶35

[ANIL S. KILOR, J.] [PRASANNA B. VARALE,J.]

¶36

Tupe

Narayan Indarrao Chavan v. Vikas Shankar Kharge and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narayan Indarrao Chavan v. Vikas Shankar Kharge 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

Anil Eknath Kolhe and Others Vs Nitin Karir and Others

Milind Bhimrao Gaikwad Vs the Principal Secretary and Others

Govind Poslya Gavit Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sayyad Asad Sayyad Nizam Vs Vishwas Pandhre Superintendent of Police Dhule

Radhabai Vitthalrao Shinde through General Power of Attorney v a Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Absaheb Baburao Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others