Sudhakar Nivruttrao Kadam v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

( 1 )

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO.653 OF 2018 IN WRIT PETITION NO.2581 OF 2017 Sudhakar S/o Nivruttrao Kadam Age 59 years, Occu.Retired R/o Parali-Vaijnath, Tq.ParaliVaijnath, District Beed PETITIONER

VERSUS

1.

The State of Maharashtra Through: Secretary, Surendrakumar Bagde, Social Welfare Department, Room No. 137, 1st Floor, Mantralaya Extension, Madam Cama Road, Hutatma Chowk, Mumbai-400 032.

2.

Dinesh Raybhanji Patil The Chief Accountant General Nagpur, District Nagpur 3.

Shri Tumbare S.K.

The Social Welfare Officer Grade-1(Gat 1) Zillah Parishad, Beed, Shriram Nagar, Kranti Nagar, Beed-431 122.

Now R/o Dist.Animal Husbandry Officer, Z.P. Ahmednagar 4.

Vinayak Tukaram Gadade The Head Master, Residential Dumb Vidyalaya,

( 2 ) Sangam Road, Parali-Vaijnath, Tq.Parali-Vaijnath, District Beed 5.

Roju H. Yedke, Social Welfare Officer, Grade-1, Zillah Parishad, Beed RESPONDENTS Mr N.L.Jadhav, Advocate for the petitioner;

Mr S.D.Ghayal,A.G.P. for respondent-State;

Mr S.S.Dambe, Advocate for respondent No. 3 and 5; Mr S.P.Salgar, Advocate for respondent No.4;

CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE & R.G. AVACHAT, JJ.

DATED :

13th AUGUST, 2019 ORAL ORDER:

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.

2.

On a grievance that the order of this Court is not complied with, notice was issued.

3.

Learned Counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 3 and 5 placed on record the copy of the decision dated 3rd August, 2019. The District Social Welfare officer, Zilla Parishad, Beed, by the said order, in compliance of the order passed by this Court heard the parties and rejected

( 3 ) the proposal submitted by the management on account of certain deficiencies.

4.

This Court in order dated 25th January, 2018 itself made it clear that in case, the petitioner is aggrieved by the decision of respondent No.3, he may avail the liberty to take further steps. Accordingly, Mr Jadhav, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would take appropriate steps to challenge the decision before the competent forum including the judicial forum.

5.

As the order of this Court is now complied with, the grievance raised in the contempt petition no more survives. The contempt petition is accordingly disposed of.

[R.G. AVACHAT, J.] [PRASANNA B. VARALE,J.] Tupe