Ramesh Motor Driving School Jalgaon Through Its Proprietor Sunil Devkinandan Zawar v. Surendrakumar Bagade And Another

1 CP - 201-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 201 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 4343 OF 2016 Ramesh Motor Driving School, Jalgaon .. Petitioner VS.

Shri Surendrakumar Bagade and anr.

.. Respondents ---- Mr. Amol S. Sawant, Advocate for the petitioner Mrs. A.V. Gondhalekar, A.G.P. for the respondent/State ---- CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ.

DATE : 12-06-2017 ORAL ORDER :

1.

We do not think that any relief much less entertaining Contempt Petition can be granted.

2.

A scheme was propounded whereunder societies like the petitioner were chosen for imparting training to backward class persons so that they learn motor driving. The petitioner claims to have trained several such persons and through his institution but he has yet to receive the funds or monies which are due and payable by the State.

3.

The money was not paid and, therefore Writ Petition was filed for consideration of the un-attended representation. All that

2 CP - 201-2017 this Court directed was consideration of this representation. The Government has considered the representation but has forwarded an explanation for not being able to adhere to the time schedule directed by this Court for the simple reason that State was alarmed by the presence of such institutions and the magnitude of the claims, purpose of the scheme was defeated. The Finance department therefore proceeded to carry out an independent third party audit of the scheme before releasing any further sums. For that five Member Committee is constituted and the Government Resolution dated 04/02/2017 is issued. It is in these circumstances, that the Government requires four (4) months time to decide upon the petitioner's representation.

4.

Reasons assigned by the Government in the affidavit do not lack in bonafides. We do not think that this is an intentional or deliberate breach or disobedience of the order passed by this Court. In the circumstances, the Contempt Petition is entirely misconceived. It is dismissed.

[MANGESH S. PATIL] [S.C. DHARMADHIKARI] JUDGE JUDGE arp/