Dismissed

Sudhakar S/o Maluji Arjunkar v. The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary of Ministry of Co. operation, Mumbai and Ors.

Bombay HC2 Dec 2024CP/315/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt petition alleging non-compliance with the order of 20.10.2023 in a writ petition concerning filling vacancies through TCS. The court found no violation, noting TCS failed to respond to the bank's communications, and dismissed the contempt petition along with the connected civil application.

What the court decided

AI extract

Sudhakar S/o Maluji Arjunkar vs The State of Maharashtra… — Contempt of Court | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-NAG:13116-DB

¶2

1 9.CP.315-2024.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶4

CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 315 OF 2024 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2342 OF 2023(D)

¶5

(Mr. Sudhakar S/o Maluji Arjunkar

¶6

Vs.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra, Thr. its Secretary of Ministry of Co-operation, Mantralaya, Mumbai, Maharashtra & Ors. )

¶8

Office No	tes, Office Memoranda of	Court's or Judge's orders
Coram,	Appearances, Court's
orders	or directions and
Registrar	's orders

¶9

Mr. Kaustubh Deogade, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. V.A. Thakare, AGP for the Respondent(s)/State. Mr. A.M. Ghare, Advocate for the Respondent No.5.

¶10

CORAM: AVINASH G. GHAROTE AND ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.

¶11

DATED : 2^nd DECEMBER, 2024

¶12

Heard.

¶13

2 . We do not see that there is any violation of the order dated 20.10.2023 passed in Writ Petition No.2342/2023, as all that it records, is the decision of the Petitioners therein to fill up the vacancies through TCS, and therefore, observes that nothing survives in the Petition and disposes it of. In view of the admitted factual position as reflected from para 3 Clause (n) of the Civil Application (CAN) No.116/2024, which states that the Chandrapur D.C.C. Bank consequent to the order dated 20.10.2023, had made several communications to TCS, however, TCS did not respond, we therefore, do not deem it appropriate to

¶14

2 9.CP.315-2024.odt

¶15

entertain the Petition. The Contempt Petition is dismissed .

¶16

3 . In view of the above dismissal of the Petition, Civil Application (CAN) No.116/2024 also does not survive.

¶17

(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.)

¶18

SD. Bhimte

¶19

Signed by: Mr.S.D.Bhimte Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 02/12/2024 19:13:34

Sudhakar S/o Maluji Arjunkar v. The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary of Ministry of Co. operation, Mumbai and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Sudhakar S/o Maluji Arjunkar v. The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary of Ministry of Co. operation, Mumbai and Ors.

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

Sau. Kanta Shriram Gavande Vs Education Officer (Sec.), Zilla Parishad, Buldhana and Others

Dilip Balaji Chakkarwar and Another Vs Union of India, through Its Secretary of Corporation Affairs, New Delhi and Another

Shruti Ganesh Gainar Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, School Education and Sports Department, Mumbai and Others

Anand S/O Purshottam Bondre and Others vs State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Buldhana and Others

Smt. Ishwari W/O Surendra Gaure vs Maharashtra State through , Its Secretary, Dept of Home Affiars, Mumbai and Others

M/S Star Enterprises Thr. Sole Proporietor, Mohammad Salim S/O. Mo. Kasam vs State of Maha., Thr. Principal Secy., Dept. of Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Prot. and Ors.