Bombay High CourtCP/103/2015dismissedrule discharged

Sou. Sunita Sunil Gujar (Ku. Sunita Vitthalrao Pakhale) v. Shri R.S. Walvi, (Joint Commissioner / Vice Chairman, Scheduled Tribe Caste Scrutiny Committee)

2015-04-21Hon'Ble Smt. Justice V.A. Naik,Hon'Ble Shri Justice A.M. Badar2 pages

1 21.04.cp.103.15.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CONTEMPT PETITION NO.103/2015 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 1190/2014 ( Sou. Sunita Sunil Gujar vs. Shri R.S. Walvi and one ) .......................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ................................................................................................................................................................... Mr.R.J. Shinde, Adv. for petitioner Mr.SDadavarte, Adv.for Respondents CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK & A.M. BADAR, JJ.

DATED : 21st April, 2015.

Heard.

By this petition, the petitioner seeks action against the respondent, under the provisions of the Contempt of the Court Act, for wilful disobedience of the order dated 24.4.2014 in Writ Petition No.1190/2014. It is stated on behalf of the petitioner that though the Scrutiny Committee was directed to verify the caste claim of the petitioner within a period of eight months, the Scrutiny Committee has not decided the same.

Shri Sadavarte, the learned counsel for the Scrutiny committee, states that the vigilance enquiry is being conducted in the matter and the Scrutiny Committee would decide the caste claim of the

2 21.04.cp.103.15. petitioner within a period of six months.

On a perusal of the order dated 24th April, 2014, of which the contempt is alleged, we do not find that this Court has directed the Committee to complete the verification proceedings within a period of eight months. This Court has only asked the Committee to attempt to complete the verification proceedings within the said time. There is no direction making it obligatory for the Committee to complete the proceedings within eight months. The learned counsel for the Scrutiny Committee has stated that the proceedings would be decided as early as possible and within a period of six months.

As we do not find that there is any disobedience of the directions issued by this Court, by the respondent-Scrutiny Committee, we dismiss the Contempt Petition, with no order as to costs.

JUDGE JUDGE sahare