Kishore Gundappa Malkunaik v. The Union Of India And Others

{1}

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO.577 OF 2019 IN WRIT PETITION NO.4750 OF 2017 Kishore s/o Gundappa Malkunaik Petitioner

Versus

The Union of India & others Respondents Mr.Shrikant Kulkarni, advocate holding for Mr.A.P.Piratwad, advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.S.B.Deshpande, Assistant Solicitor General of India (ASGI) for Respondents No.1 and 2.

CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE & AVINASH G. GHAROTE, JJ.

DATE : 03rd October, 2019 PER COURT:

Mr.S.B.Deshpande, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India, appearing for Respondents No.1 and 2, submitted before this Court that vide order of this Court dated 11.09.2018 in the writ petition, a statement was made on behalf of Respondentemployer, that the inquiry proceedings initiated against the petitioner will be concluded within a period of three months from the date of the order, which was accepted and the petition was disposed of.

{2} Learned Assistant Solicitor General of India further submits that though a grievance is raised in this petition in respect of non compliance of the order, the order of this Court is duly complied with but there is some delay in maintaining the stipulated period, as directed by this Court. He submits that the delay was caused due to procedural formalities. He submits before this Court that the Respondents tender an unconditional apology for the delay caused and submit that as the reason was an administrative difficulty, the delay was for bona fide reason and not an intentional one.

We accept the statement in the form of apology. Perused the order dated 29.08.2019, issued by Divisional Security Commissioner, RPF, Guntakal. The same is taken on record and marked "X" for identification. The disciplinary authority concluded the proceedings with an order of imposing punishment on the petitioner of reduction in one rank for a period of three years with non cumulative effect with immediate effect, as per RPF Rules. As the order of this Court is now complied with, the Contempt Petition is accordingly disposed of. Needless to state

{3} that if the petitioner is having any grievance against the order dated 29.08.2019, issued by the Divisional Security Commissioner, RPF, Guntakal, he may avail appropriate remedies in accordance with law, if so advised.

AVINASH G. GHAROTE PRASANNA B. VARALE JUDGE JUDGE adb/