Dismissed

Court on Its Motion v. Mr. S. S. Munnoli, the Executive Egineer, Bembla Project Division, Yavatmal (i.e. R-3)

Bombay HC29 Apr 2024SMC/1/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This suo motu contempt petition sought proceedings against an Executive Engineer for delay in depositing compensation. The court dropped the proceeding after UAP submitted the amount and apologized. The bench sought the Executive Director's attention to prevent future lapses.

What did the court decide?

Dropped the suo motu contempt proceeding. Directed the copy of the order to be forwarded to the Executive Director of VIDC for issuing appropriate instructions.

Court on Its Motion Vs Mr. S. S. Munnoli, the Executive… — Contempt of Court | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

1 25-SMCP No.1.2024.odt

¶2

2024:BHC-NAG:5397

¶3

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

¶4

SUO MOTU CONTEMPT PETITION NO.1 OF 2024 IN CIVIL APPLICATION (CAF) NO. 529 OF 2024 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 303 OF 2021 (D)

¶5

Court on it’s Motion .VS.

¶6

Mr. S.S. Munnoli, the Executive Engineer, Bembla Project Division, Yavatmal (i.e. respondent No.3)

¶7

________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders.

¶8

Mr. Rajesh Nagpure, Advocate for applicant in CAF No.529/2024. Mr. M.A. Kadu, Advocate for the respondent No.3 in CAF No.529/2024. Ms. Mukta Kavimandan, AGP for respondent/State in CAF No.529/2024.

¶9

CORAM : G.A. SANAP, J. DATE : APRIL 29, 2024.

¶10

Heard.

¶11

This proceeding has been initiated as suo moto contempt proceeding. There was delay on the part of the officials of V.I.D.C. to deposit the amount within six weeks from the date of judgment and order dated 27^th October, 2023, uploaded on 01^st November, 2023. Pursuant to the service of contempt notice, an affidavit has been filed by the contemnor. In his affidavit, he has placed on record the

¶12

2 25-SMCP No.1.2024.odt

¶13

actual state of affairs. Two Advocates appearing for V.I.D.C. have filed their respective affidavits.

¶14

It is seen on perusal of the affidavits that the Advocates have categorically stated in their affidavits that the order dated 27^th October, 2023 uploaded on 01^st November, 2023 was communicated on 27^th December, 2023. It is also pointed out that on 15^th January, 2024, the cheque of the amount of compensation was prepared and it was received by the Advocate on 22^nd January, 2024. Learned Advocate for V.I.D.C. submits that the delay in depositing the amount is not intentional. It is pointed out that administrative procedure took time. The Advocates in their affidavits have admitted that there was a delay in communicating the order. It is seen that from the date of communication of the order, on 27^th December, 2023, the cheque was prepared on 15^th January, 2024 and the same was deposited on 28^th March, 2024 by the Advocate.

¶15

On going through the affidavit filed by the contemnor, it is seen that he has tendered unconditional apology. In this proceeding, the entire amount has already been deposited. Learned Advocate for the applicant/claimant submits that the purpose has been served. In my view, this is not a case to directly held the Officer responsible for this mess. In any case he has tendered the apology. The apology is accepted.

¶16

3 25-SMCP No.1.2024.odt

¶17

In view of this, the suo moto contempt proceeding is dropped.

¶18

In order to avoid such instances or lapses on the part of the officials of the Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation in future, it would be appropriate to forward the copy of this order to the Executive Director of the Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation for information and for issuing appropriate instructions to all concerned.

¶19

The Registrar (Judicial), shall forward the copy of this order to the Executive Director, Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation , Sinchan Bhavan, Nagpur.

¶20

(G. A. SANAP, J.)

¶21

Kirtak

Court on Its Motion v. Mr. S. S. Munnoli, the Executive Egineer, Bembla Project Division, Yavatmal (i.e. R-3)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Court on Its Motion v. Mr. S. S. Munnoli, the Executive Egineer, Bembla Project Division, Yavatmal (i.e. R-3)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sagar Shekhar Makre Vs State of Mah. Thr. Pso Hinganghat, Tq. Hinganghat, Distt. Wardha.

Dattatray Ramsisan Thombare Vs Jyoti Dattatray Thombare

Smt. Vaishali Bandu Dudhe vs Nitin Ganpatrao Bhowate

Namdeo Narayan Dhawale Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Yavatmal and Others

V.I.D.C., through Its Executive Engineer, Purna Medium Project, Division, Achalpur Vs Suresh Shankar Ghunare and Others

V.I.D.C., through Its Executive Engineer, Purna Medium Project, Division, Achalpur Vs Jaikrushna Ramnarayan Mohta(Died) Thr. Lrs. Kamlabai Jaikrushna Mohta and Others