Bombay High CourtCP/83/2020disposed offdismissed for default

Pandit Damu Wagh v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

2020-03-11Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prasanna B. Varale,Hon'Ble Shri Justice R. G. Avachat2 pages

1 912-cp-83-2020.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO.83 OF 2020 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 814 OF 2016 Pandit Damu Wagh ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Maharashtra and others ... Respondents ....

Mr. P. B. Patil, Advocate for petitioner Mrs A. V. Gondhalekar, AGP for the State ....

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

DATED : 11th MARCH, 2020 PER COURT :- Heard Mr. Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2.

Mrs. Gondhalekar, learned AGP appearing for respondent No.3 submitted that though respondent No.3 was not party to the Writ Petition No.814 of 2016 and the Assistant Director, Vocational Education and Training, Regional Office, Nashik, was party to the Writ Petition, Mr. S. R. Suryawansbhi, Joint Director, Vocational Education and Training, Regional Office, Nashik, who is personally present in this Court is the competent authority to take decision and being the competent authority respondent No.3 has passed the order on 28.02.2020. Learned AGP, on instructions, further submitted that

2 912-cp-83-2020.doc as there were some administrative and procedural difficulties, such as the confusion made in the status of parties, there is delay in taking the decision. It is also submitted by learned AGP that now the decision is taken by respondent No.3 and the copy of order dated 28.02.2020 is placed on record. All the necessary facts are referred to in the preface of the order and ultimately respondent No.3 apprised the order upholding the entitlement of the petitioner for the pension and other pensionary benefits by treating the services of the petitioner for the period from 01.11.1993 to 30.09.2008. The reliance is placed on the provisions of the Maharashtra Civil Service Rules, 1982. The learned AGP submits that respondent No.3 who is personally present in this Court, tendered his unconditional apology for the delay.

As the order of this Court is now duly complied with and now by accepting the apology tendered to this Court, it can safely be stated that the order of this Court is complied with and the grievance of the petitioner is no more survives. The Contempt Petition is accordingly disposed of.

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