Vinod Sakharamji Deshmukh v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

901-CP-140-19.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 140 OF 2019 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 5401 OF 2018 Vinod Sakharamji Deshmukh ..PETITIONER

VERSUS

State of Maharashtra and Others ..RESPONDENTS ....

Mr. B.V. Thombre, Advocate for petitioner Mr. V.S. Badakh, A.G.P. for respondent - State Mr. S.B. Pulkundwar, Advocate for respondent no.3 ....

CORAM : P.B. VARALE AND R.G. AVACHAT, JJ.

DATED : 03rd JULY, 2019 PER COURT :

Heard learned Counsel for petitioner.

2.

In response to simple notice issued by this Court to Respondent No.3 on 22nd February, 2019, Mr. Pulkundwar, learned Counsel appearing for Respondent No.3 placed on record copy of order dated 04th April, 2019. Learned Counsel for Respondent No.3 submitted that Division Bench of this Court, by order dated 11th June, 2018 passed in Writ Petition No. 5401 of 2018, was pleased to direct Respondent No.3 to decide the representation application of petitioner on its own merits, in accordance with law and policy 1 / 2

901-CP-140-19.odt within stipulated period. Learned Counsel further submitted that there is some delay in the decision and the delay caused is not intentional but bonafide viz. administrative and procedural difficulties. 3.

Copy of order dated 04th April, 2019 is taken on record and marked "X" for identification. Respondent No.3 - authority, by assigning reasons, rejected the representation application of petitioner. As such, the order of this Court is complied with, though belatedly. Considering this very aspect, we see no reason to keep the contempt petition pending now. 4.

Contempt petition is accordingly disposed of with liberty to petitioner to approach the competent authority to challenge the order dated 04th April, 2019, if petitioner as aggrieved by same and so advised. ( R.G. AVACHAT, J. ) ( P.B. VARALE, J. ) SSD 2 / 2