A contempt petition challenging the respondent authorities' failure to comply with an interim order was dismissed at the threshold. The court held the petition was merit-less, as the original order granted liberty to authorities rather than binding directions.
Contempt petition is dismissed at the threshold.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
912-CP-75-20.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 75 OF 2020 IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 9741 OF 2019
Balasaheb Bhanudas Holker
..PETITIONER
VERSUS
State of Maharashtra and Another
..RESPONDENTS
Mr. S.G. Jadhavar, Advocate for petitioner
CORAM : P.B. VARALE AND R.G. AVACHAT, JJ. DATED : 22nd JANUARY, 2020
PER COURT :
Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner at length on grievance that the order of this Court dated 22nd November, 2019 passed in Writ Petition No. 9741 of 2019 is not complied with and the respondent State authorities are acting contrary to the order of this Court. The petitioner is therefore, before this Court.
1 / 3
912-CP-75-20.odt
non confidence motion and that the election of post occupied by the petitioner shall not be held for three weeks from the date of the order and with further permission to the authority to proceed further on lapse of three weeks so as to elect new Sarpanch and accordingly the petition is disposed of.
912-CP-75-20.odt
directions issued by this Court. Though learned Counsel invited our attention to the prayer clause of the petition, undisputedly, the petition is dismissed and there is no question of granting of any prayer sought for by the petitioner. Also the parties aggrieved by some action of the respondent State authority had approached the District Collector, Latur and the Collector issued a notice and passed an interim order. Now, if this is an order passed in a quasi-judicial proceeding, the party, who is aggrieved by this order, can certainly go before that very authority for seeking vacation of the interim order or the said interim order can be modified/recalled in the proceeding. Apart from that, when the petitioner himself is a party respondent to the said proceeding as Respondent No.7, against whom notice is issued, he is not prevented to participate in the proceeding and seek for recall of the order, if the petitioner feels so aggrieved.
( R.G. AVACHAT, J. ) ( P.B. VARALE, J. )
SSD
3 / 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petition challenging non-compliance with the interim order therein deserves to be entertained.
Whether the government's issuance of a notice and interim order constitutes contempt of the High Court.
Balasaheb Bhanudas Holker
State of Maharashtra
P.B. Varale
R.G. Avachat
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
