Shivaji Shankarrao Pawar v. Sumit Mulick And Others
(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO.202 OF 2018 IN WRIT PETITION NO.7955 OF 2014 Shivaji s/o Shankarrao Pawar, Age: 69 years, Occu: Pensioner, R/o: Ramnagar Kakde Plot, Near Sant Tukaram Maharaj Temple, Osmanabad, Tq. & Dist. Osmanabad ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1.
Shri. Sumit Mulick, Chief Secretary,, Government of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 Shri. Dineshkumar Jain, Additional Chief Secretary, (Finance) Department, Maharashtra State, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 Shri. V. Giriraj I.A.S., Secretary, Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 Dr. Sanjay Kolte, Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Osmanabad, District Osmanabad ..RESPONDENTS WITH CONTEMPT PETITION NO.203 OF 2018 IN WRIT PETITION NO.9540 OF 2014 Ramakant s/o Narsingh Munde, Age: 69 years, Occu: Pensioner, R/o: Kot Galli, Osmanabad Tq. & Dist. Osmanabad ..PETITIONER
(2)
VERSUS
1.
Shri. Sumit Mulick, Chief Secretary,, Government of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 Shri. Dineshkumar Jain, Additional Chief Secretary, (Finance) Department, Maharashtra State, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 Shri. V. Giriraj I.A.S., Secretary, Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 Dr. Sanjay Kolte, Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Osmanabad, District Osmanabad ..RESPONDENTS Mr Pradeep Salunke, Advocate h/f Mr V. G. Salgare, Advocate for petitioners;
Mrs A. V. Gondhalekar, A.G.P. for respondent/State; Mr R. D. Raut, Advocate for respondent No.4 CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND R. G. AVACHAT, JJ.
DATE : 5th March, 2020 ORAL ORDER:
By our order dated 27th September, 2018, simple notice was issued to respondent No.4 on a submission that respondent No.4 failed to comply the order of this Court.
(3) Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.4 submits before this Court that the order of this Court is duly complied with. The benefit of revised pension is granted and the amount is also disbursed in favour of the petitioners. He further submits that there is some delay in compliance of the order of this Court and the same is unintentional and for bona fide reason, namely, certain proceedings were initiated post order of this Court, such as, Special Leave Petition preferred by the State Government and as such, delay be condoned by accepting unconditional apology.
Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners admits the aforesaid statement that the order of this Court is duly complied with.
In view of aforesaid facts, the grievance raised in the present petitions no more survives. As such, the present contempt petitions stand disposed of.
5.
We further make it clear that if the petitioners are having any grievance insofar as other service benefits are concerned, they may avail appropriate remedy available under the law by approaching the competent forum, including judicial forum.
(R. G. AVACHAT, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.) sjk