Disposed

Nikhil Santosh Chaudhari v. Vilas Mahadevrao Rajurkar and Others

Bombay HC1 Nov 2023CP/707/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a contempt petition challenging the Supreme Court order regarding his appointment as a Labourer. Since the petitioner is already appointed, the Court disposed of the petition holding no purpose would be served in continuation.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition disposed of; petitioner directed to approach proper forum for appointment grievance.

Nikhil Santosh Chaudhari Vs Vilas Mahadevrao Rajurkar… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

( 1 ) cp707.19

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

953 CONT. PETITION NO.707 OF 2019
IN WP/6064/2014

¶4

NIKHIL SANTOSH CHAUDHARI VERSUS

¶5

VILAS MAHADEVRAO RAJURKAR AND OTHERS

¶6

Mr.Ajay Deshpande, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.M.M. Nerlikar, APP for the respondent/State.

¶7

CORAM: R.G. AVACHAT &
KISHORE C. SANT, JJ.
DATED: 01.11.2023

¶8

PC :-

¶9

01. Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner. This contempt petition

¶10

is filed for the contempt of order dated 05.09.2018 passed in Writ Petition No.

¶11

6064 of 2014, whereby the respondents were directed to consider the
petitioner and respondent No.3 for appointment to the post of Labourer from
OBC category. Further it was directed to consider the said claim within a
period of four weeks.

¶12

02.Now it is submitted that the petitioner is given appointment on

¶13

24.08.2023. The claim of the learned Advocate for the petitioner is that

¶14

respondent No.3 was, however, appointed in March/April, 2019 itself and thus
the said compliance cannot be said to be strict compliance as the appointment
is given in August, 2023. He submits that because of late action, the
petitioner has suffered financial loss and other service benefits.

¶15

03.This Court finds that the petitioner can certainly agitate his
grievance before the proper forum. No order can be passed while dealing
with the contempt petition.

¶16

04.Since the petitioner is already appointed, this Court finds that no

¶17

purpose would be served by keeping the petition pending. In view of the
same, the contempt petition stands disposed off.

¶18

05.Needless to say that all other remedies are open to the petitioner.

¶19

[KISHORE C. SANT, J.][R.G. AVACHAT, J.]

¶20

snk/2023/NOV23/cp707.19

Nikhil Santosh Chaudhari v. Vilas Mahadevrao Rajurkar and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nikhil Santosh Chaudhari v. Vilas Mahadevrao Rajurkar and Others

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

Manoj Devichand Munot Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Dr. Vijay Devichand Munot Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vaibhav Manikrao Morale and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Raju Rama Naik Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Ajit Krushna Ghanekar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Akash Sunil Mahadik Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another