Mahadeo Ramchandra Kamble And ... vs Kalyan Laluji Dongre
2019 Latest Caselaw 94 Bom

                                                1                           cp 116.17.odt

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

                          Contempt Petition No.116 of 2017
                                          In
                          Writ Petition No.2560 pf 2016(P)
                      (Mahadeo Kamble and others V Kalyan Dongre)
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Office Notes, Office Memoranda of                                       Court's or Judges Order.
                 Coram, appearances, Court's Orders
                 or directions and Registrar's orders.
Mr. A.P. Thakare, Counsel for petitioners.
Mr. V.K. Paliwal, Counsel for respondent.
Mr. R.L. Khapre, Counsel for intervenor.

Coram : Manish Pitale, J.

Dated : 01st April, 2019.

By this Contempt Petition, the petitioners have contended that the sole respondent/alleged contemnor had committed contempt of order dated 28-06-2016, passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.2560 of 2016. It is undisputed that the sole respondent herein was respondent no.1 in the aforesaid Writ Petition No.2560 of 2016. In this backdrop, it would be relevant to reproduce the order dated 28-06-2016 of this Court :-

"Heard Shri A.M. Gorde, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri A.P. Thakare, Advocate for the petitioners, Shri V.K. Paliwal, learned Advocate for respondent No.1-caveator.

Issue notice, returnable on 22nd of August, 2016. Shri A.D. Sonak, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives notice for respondent nos. 8 and 9.

By an ad interim order, the effect,

2 cp 116.17.odt

operation and implementation of the impugned order passed by the learned District Judge is stayed. However, it is clarified that the petitioners who are in office as per the decision of the Assistant Charity Commissioner and maintained by the Joint Charity Commissioner, shall not take any policy decision, shall not make any appointment in the schools administered by the trust, shall not take any disciplinary action against the employees working in the schools and shall not transfer the employees."

2. It is clear that the respondent herein was not one of the petitioners in Writ Petition No.2560 of 2016. In this context, an identical order passed in Writ Petition No.2562 of 2016 is relevant, wherein this Court while issuing notice had granted interim order in identical terms. In the context of the said case a Contempt Petition bearing No.206 of 2017, was filed and allegations identical to the contentions raised in the present Contempt Petition, were pressed into service and it was claimed that the respondent therein had committed contempt of the aforesaid order of this Court as decisions regarding transfer etc. were taken by him. The Division Bench of this Court found that since the alleged contemnor in the said Contempt Petition was not one of the petitioners in Writ Petition it could not be said that he had committed any contempt of the order of this Court.

3. In the present case also, the sole respondent was not one of the petitioners in Writ Petition No.2560 of 2016 and therefore, it cannot be said that the said respondent had committed contempt of the order dated

3 cp 116.17.odt

28-06-2016 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.2560 of 2016. There is no reason for this Court to take a view different from the one taken by the Division Bench in identical circumstances.

4. In view of the above, the Contempt Petition is found to be without any merit and it is dismissed.

JUDGE Deshmukh