Suresh S/O. Namdeorao Pangul, Wardha v. Shri. Vikas Chandra Rastogi, Principal Secretary, Higher And Technical Education Dept. And Others

2024:BHC-NAG:10975-DB 921-CP-42-2022.odt 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.

CONTEMPT PETITION NO.42 OF 2022 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1175 OF 2016(D) Suresh Namdeorao Pangul, Shegao (Kund), Tq. Hinganghat, Dist. Wardha. vs.

Mr. Vikas Chandra Rastogi, Principal Secretary, Higher and Technical Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai and others.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court'

s or Judge'

s Order Coram, appearances, Court'

s Orders or directions and Registrar'

s order ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Anand Parchure, Advocate for petitioner.

Mr. H.R.Dhumale, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent nos.1 to 3. Mr. V. K. Paliwal, Advocate for respondent nos. 4 and 5. CORAM :- BHARATI DANGRE AND ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ. DATE :- 1st OCTOBER, 2024 P. C.

Heard.

2.

In compliance of the order dated 01.08.2024 the Principal Secretary, Higher and Technical Education Department, Mr. Vikas Chandra Rastogi, has affirmed the affidavit, stating the progress of the proceedings that are initiated against the respondent no.3 by issuing show cause notice asking him to respond within stipulated time.

The affidavit also state that the Government has taken efforts to make the subordinate officials aware about the procedure to be followed in conducting the court cases, before the High Court and the Hon'

ble Supreme Court. It is also stated that by holding periodical meetings of court cases, proper training was given to all the Joint Directors working under the Higher & Technical Education Department and they were made aware about the importance and gravity of the matters.

Reference is also made to the procedure published by the Law and Judiciary department for dealing with court cases and the officials were made aware of the same.

921-CP-42-2022.odt 2 Paragraphs 4 and 5 of the affidavit deal with the action taken against the respondent no.3.

We have taken the affidavit on record as compliance of the order passed by this Court.

3.

As far as directions for providing duplicate service book complete in all respect, Mr. Paliwal, learned counsel representing respondent nos. 4 and 5, has made a statement that the said direction has been complied with.

4.

Being satisfied that the compliance at the end of the State Government as well as on the part of the respondent nos. 4 and 5, we express that the contempt has been purged and therefore the proceedings initiated through Contempt Petition No.42 of 2022 are dropped.

(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (BHARATI DANGRE , J.) Andurkar.