Eknath Namdeo Jambhulkar v. The State Of Maharashtra, The Secretary, Revenue And Forest Department

Chittewan 24. CP 21-21.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.21 OF 2021 RAJESH VASANT CHITTEWAN Date: 2022.01.04 18:20:24 +0530 RAJESH VASANT CHITTEWAN IN WRIT PETITION NO.14540 OF 2018 Shri Eknath Namdeo Jambhulkar ...

Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra And Others ... Respondents ****** Mr. Y.B. Lengare a/w Wilson Robi for the Petitioner. Mr. Rajan S. Pawar, AGP for Respondent No.1.

****** CORAM : R. D. DHANUKA & S. M. MODAK, JJ.

DATE : 4th JANUARY 2022.

P.C. :- .

The Petitioner has filed this petition alleging willful and deliberate breach of the order dated 7 February 2019 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.14540 of 2018 and order dated 27 October 2020 passed by this Court in Contempt Petition No.455 of 2019. Our attention is invited to the order dated 14 January 2020 passed by this Court in Contempt Petition No.455 of 2019. By the said order, this Court prima facie found that despite granting opportunity to Respondent No.3Deputy Collector (Resettlement), Pune, has not complied with the order dated 7 February 2019 and is in breach of the said order. 1/2

Chittewan 24. CP 21-21.odt When the said Contempt Petition appeared before this Court on 27 October 2020, learned AGP made a statement before this Court that District Re-Settlement Officer shall take a decision on the application of the Petitioner for allotment of alternate land within a period of four weeks from the date of deposit the sum of Rs.6,474/- by the Petitioner with the District Re-Settlement Officer.

Learned AGP invited our attention to Exhibit '1' to the affidavit in reply dated 13 September 2021, i.e. the order dated 13 September 2021, thereby rejecting the application filed by the Petitioner. The averment is also made in that regard in paragraph-3 of the affidavit in reply dated 13 September 201, which is not controverted by the Petitioner. In view of Respondent No.3 having been complied with the order of this court, we do not propose to take any action under the Contempt of Courts Act 1971. If the Petitioner is aggrieved by the said order dated 13 September 2021 passed by the Deputy Collector (Rehabilitation), Dist. Pune, the Petitioner is at liberty to impugn the said order in accordance with law. The contempt petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. [S. M. MODAK, J.] [R. D. DHANUKA, J.] 2/2