← Library
Bombay High CourtCP/674/2019disposed offdismissed for default

Jagannath Gorakh Thakur v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

2020-03-03Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prasanna B. Varale,Hon'Ble Shri Justice R. G. Avachat2 pages

674.19cp (1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO.674 OF 2019 IN WRIT PETITION NO.8244 OF 2018 Jagannath s/o Gorakh Thakur, Age: 61 years, Occu: Retired as Electrician, R/o. Yeshodhan Colony, Plot No.28, Deopur, Tq. & Dist. Dhule ..PETITIONER

VERSUS

1.

The State of Maharashtra, Through Secretary, Department of Tribal Development, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 2.

Shri. Dinesh A. Tidke, Member Secretary of the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nandurbar Division, Nandurbar 3.

The Executive Engineer, Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran, Water Management Department, Holaram Colony, Saduwaswani Road, Nashik 4.

Senior Account Officer, Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran, CIDCO Bhavan (South Wing), Belapur, New Mumbai-14 ..RESPONDENTS Mr G. K. Chinchole, Advocate h/f Mr S. C. Yeramwar, Advocate for petitioner;

Mr K. N. Lokhande, A.G.P. for respondent No.1 CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND R. G. AVACHAT, JJ.

DATE : 3rd March, 2020

674.19cp (2) ORAL ORDER:

Heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. 2.

Learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader, by inviting our attention to the statement made in the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of respondent No.2 - Shri. D. A. Tidke, Deputy Director and Member Secretary, Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nandurbar, submits that the claim for validation filed by the petitioner before the Committee is decided. He also submits that there is some delay in decision and the same is due to heavy workload in the office of the respondents and also for the procedural formalities, such as, adjournment granted to the petitioner on his request. He further submits that the deponent tenders unconditional apology for the delay caused in the decision.

3.

Considering the fact that the claim of the petitioner is now decided and the deponent has tendered unconditional apology for the delay, the grievance of the petitioner raised in the petition does not survive. As such, the present contempt petition stands disposed of. (R. G. AVACHAT, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.) sjk