Disposed

Ashutosh Nandakishor Ranade v. Deccan Education Society through Trustee Neel Helekar and Secretary Kulkarni

Bombay HC2 May 2024CP/287/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt petition over compliance with an earlier High Court order regarding a service proposal. The respondent management undertook to forward the petitioner's signed proposal to the State, which agreed to decide it within six weeks; petitioner signed without prejudice to his higher pay scale claim.

What the court decided

AI extract

Ashutosh Nandakishor Ranade vs Deccan Education Society… — Contempt of Court | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

20-CP-287-2024.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 287 OF 2024

¶4

Ashutosh Nandakishor Ranade ...Petitioner Versus Deccan Education Society Through Trustee Neel Helekar And Secretary Kulkarni ...Respondent

¶5

Mr. Ashutosh N. Ranade, Petitioner in person. Ms. Dhruti Datar, for Respondents Nos. 1 to 2. Mr. S.D. Rayarikar, A.G.P. for Respondent No.3 – State.

¶6

CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J. DATE : 15^th JULY, 2024

¶7

P.C.:

¶8

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶9

The learned counsel respondent No.1 management submits,

¶10

SAJAKALI LIYAKAT JAMADAR

¶11

Digitally signed by SAJAKALI LIYAKAT JAMADAR Date: 2024.07.15 14:41:29 +0530

¶12

that the proposal has not been signed by the petitioner on account of which they have not been able to comply with the order dated 03.11.2023 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 5689/2011. The petitioner, who appears in person, submits, that the proposal is incorrect, as the entitlement of the petitioner to higher pay scale, is yet to be decided which is pending with the management.

1 of 2

Sajakali Jamadar

20-CP-287-2024.doc

The learned counsel for the respondent No.1-management submits that the respondent No.1 would decide the applicability of the higher pay scale to the petitioner, as per his demand and as reflected in the communication of the management dated 15.05.2024 addressed to the education officer and then send the same to the education officer for his approval.

¶17

Accepting the statement, the respondent No.1 undertakes to send the proposal of the petitioner as of now to the State for approval, provided the petitioner signs it, which the petitioner is willing to do without prejudice to his rights to claim entitlement to higher pay scale. In case the petitioner signs the proposal, without prejudice to the rights as indicated above, the respondent No.1-management shall forward the same to the respondent No.3, who shall consider and decide the same within a period of six weeks from the date of its receipts. The contempt petition is accordingly disposed off.

¶18

(AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.)

¶19

2 of 2

¶20

Sajakali Jamadar

Ashutosh Nandakishor Ranade v. Deccan Education Society through Trustee Neel Helekar and Secretary Kulkarni

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Ashutosh Nandakishor Ranade v. Deccan Education Society through Trustee Neel Helekar and Secretary Kulkarni

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Eeshaanee Mahesh Malhotra vs Nitesh @ Nitty Satish Malhotra and Anr.

Milind Shriram Limaye, Founder and President of Competitive Tournament Rummy Players Association vs the State of Maharashtra Thru Its Dept. of Home and Ors.

Milind Shriram Limaye Founder and President of Competitive Tournament Rummy Players Association vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Dept. of Home and Ors.

Bhiva Mhankal Pandhare and Ors. vs Bharat Mahadeo Shejal and Ors.

Ramrao Atmarao Bachhav and Ors. vs Education Officer, Secondary Zilla Parishad, Nashik and Ors.

Mayuri Suresh Bamne vs State of Maharashtra