Jyoti Bhagawan Pawar @ Jyoti Gulab Mahale v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

1 952-cp-287-18 in wp 8696-17.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 287 OF 2018 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 8696 OF 2017 JYOTI BHAGAWAN PAWAR @ JYOTI GULAB MAHALE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Shri G. J. Pahilwan AGP for Respondent No.1- State : Shri S. R. Yadav ...

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.

DATED : 7th AUGUST, 2018.

...

PER COURT :

1.

I have heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned AGP on behalf of respondent No.1. 2.

The grievance of the petitioner is that after her disqualification, when this Court had granted ad-interim relief, the Gramsevak has issued a letter dated 08/09/2017 addressed to the petitioner that she should not function as a Up-Sarpanch as well as a member of the Grampanchayat. 3.

I find that in Writ Petition No. 8696/2017, the impugned order was with regard to the disqualification of this petitioner as a Up-Sarpanch under Section 10-1A of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act for having failed to submit a Caste

2 952-cp-287-18 in wp 8696-17.odt Validity Certificate within 6 months.

4.

This Court (Coram : Sunil P. Deshmukh, J.), ordered on 13/07/2017 as under :- ''Till the returnable date, further action in consequence of impugned order in present writ petition shall be kept in abeyance.''

5.

I, therefore, find that this Court had not stayed the disqualification of the petitioner and had merely ordered that further consequences pursuant to such disqualification shall be stayed.

6.

The learned AGP submits, on instructions, that the position was not declared vacant and was not filled in. 7.

Considering the above, I do not find that a case under the Contempt of Courts Act has been made out. 8.

This petition being devoid of merit is, therefore, dismissed.

(RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.) shp/-