Yuvaraj Sandipan Sawant vs B.N.Bastewad And Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 3591 Bom

                                                                                      4conpwl147.doc

                      ssp
                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

                                   CONTEMPT PETITION (L) NO. 147 OF 2018
                                                   IN
                                      WRIT PETITION NO. 111 OF 2013


                      Yuvraj Sandipan Sawant                                  ...Petitioner
                      vs.
                      B.N.Bastwed and Anr.                                    ...Respondents

                      Mr.P.B.Shah i/b Kayval Shah for the Petitioner
                      Ms S.U.Deshmukh for the Respondent Nos.2 and 3.


         Digitally
         signed by
                                               CORAM : K.K.TATED AND
                                                       RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, JJ.

ShubhaS.

ShubhaS. Pathak Pathak Date:

2021.03.03 10:51:29 +0530

DATE : FEBRUARY 25, 2021.

P. C. :

. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2 By this Contempt Petition, it is alleged that the Respondents failed and neglected to comply with the order dated 24th January 2017 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.111 of 2013.

3 The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that this Court by the said order dated 24th January 2017 directed Respondent-MHADA to consider Petitioner's representation for the purpose of promotion. Learned counsel for the Petitioner relied upon paragraph 28 of the order dated 24th January 2017 which reads thus:

4conpwl147.doc

"28 The Writ Petition is disposed off in the above terms. All benefits as aforestated shall be made admissible as expeditiously as possible and within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, we clarify that in the light of the order passed in the Petitioners' case, noe of those who are seeking to intervene and raising apprehension as far as their promotional avenues and chances are concerned, shall be affected by this order. As far as those employees are concerned, they would also be entitled to the benefits of promotion etc in accordance with the Rules. We also direct that as far as seniority is concerned, at least such employees who were initially working on the RGNP and WBP projects are concerned, a common seniority list of such employees would be prepared and if so advised their placements would be in accordance with the order and direction and agreement reached between the parties in this Court. We are informed that as far as these persons are concerned, including these Petitioners, there are no promotional avenues or channels beyond Community Development Officers. At least while promoting the Deputy Community Development Officers to the Community Development Officer's post, this seniority list would be adhered to. We clarify that the channel may be that the Deputy Community Development Officer can acquire promotion of Community Development Officer and if such posts are not adequate and sufficient in numbers, the Deputy Community Development Officer would definitely draw the

4conpwl147.doc

benefit of career advancement scheme/progression scheme. That is, in the event they comply with the Rules in that behalf and there are no promotional avenues available for them. As far as Community Development Officers are concerned, they do not have any further promotional avenues for the present. We leave the matter at that and it is for MHADA to consider as to whether this conflict and which is proposed to be resolved between the regular set of employees and those absorbed and placed like the Petitioners ought to be continued perennially and permanently or at some stage there would be a common seniority and promotional avenues available for them."

4 Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner by their letters/representations dated 17th February 2017 and 22nd May 2017 requested Respondent-MHADA to consider and implement the Judgment dated 24th January 2017 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.11 of 2013. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that as the Respondent failed and neglected to comply with the order, therefore, the present Petition.

5 Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Petitioner in Contempt Petition and representations dated 17th February 2017 and 22nd May 2017 have not been decided by the Respondents, hence, the following order is passed:

(a) Registry is directed to issue notice before admission to the Respondents returnable on 22nd March 2021.

4conpwl147.doc

(b) It is made clear that this notice shall not be construed as Notice under Chapter LVIII Rule 1035 (1) of the Bombay High Court (Original Side Rules).

(c) In addition to usual mode of service, Petitioner is permitted to serve the Respondents by private notice along with entire proceedings by hand delivery and filed affidavit of service on or before 15th March 2021.

(d) Leave to amend is granted.

[RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, J.]                                   [ K.K.TATED, J.]