Sayad Yusufuddin Sayed Bahauddin v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

77.17cp (1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO.77 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO.8647 OF 2015 Sayed Yusufuddin s/o Sayed Bahauddin, Age: 70 years, Occu: Agril, R/o Hattikhana, Beed, Dist. Beed ..PETITIONER

VERSUS

1.

The State of Maharashtra, Through Collector, Beed, Mr Nawal Kumar Ram, Age: 40 years, Occu: Collector, Dist. Beed 2.

The Executive Engineer, P.W.D. Department, Beed, Dist. Beed, Mr Naikwade P.G.

..RESPONDENT Mr G. K. Thigale (Naik), Advocate for petitioner; Mrs A. V. Gondhalekar, A.G.P. for respondent No.1 CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ.

DATE : 4th December, 2018 ORAL ORDER:

In response to the notice of this Court, the affidavit-in-reply is filed on behalf of respondent No.2 by Mr Navnath Dnyanoba Shinde, Executive engineer, PWD, Beed as well as on behalf of respondent No.1 Mr Mahindrakumar Kamble, Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition Officer, Beed.

77.17cp (2) It is submitted in the affidavit-in-reply that in compliance to the order of this Court, the amount of rental compensation has been deposited in the respective accounts of the petitioner, namely, Sayed Yusufuddin Sayed Bahauddin Qadri and Shri Waman Prabhuji Kshirsagar at State Bank of India, Branch Rajurives, Beed. Along with the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of respondent No.2 by Mr Shinde, the copies of Electronic Payment Advice is placed on record to submit that the amount is deposited in the accounts of the petitioner and is also received by the respective branch. 2.

It is further stated in the affidavit-in-reply that there is delay in compliance of the order of this Court and the respondents tender unconditional apology for the delay. In view of the fact that the order of this Court is complied with and the respondents have tendered unconditional apology, the grievance of the petitioner is redressed and nothing survives in the petition. If the petitioner has any grievance in respect of quantification of the amount, he is at liberty to avail appropriate remedies under law, if so advised. The petition is accordingly disposed of. (MANGESH S. PATIL, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.) sjk