← Library
Bombay High CourtCP/121/2024dismissed

Adiwasi Gramin Vikas Sanstha Dhanapur Through Its President, Murlidhar Keshao Alam v. Smt Naina A Gunde, The Commissioner Tribal Development, Maharashtra State, Nashik

2024-09-27Hon'Ble Smt. Justice Bharati Harish Dangre,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Abhay J. Mantri2 pages

1 cp121.24

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH, AT NAGPUR.

CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 121 OF 2024 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 7353 OF 2022 ( Adiwasi Gramin Vikas Sanstha, Dhanapur ..vs.. Smt. Naina A. Gunde, Commissioner, Tribal Development, Nashik ) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. A.A. Dhawas, Counsel for the petitioner.

CORAM : BHARATI DANGRE & ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.

DATED : 27-09-2024 By order dated 06-12-2023, the Commissioner, Tribal Development, Maharashtra State was directed to take decision on the proposal of the petitioners for permission to run a Sainik Ashram School at Karwa, Chandrapur within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 2.

Alleging disobedience of the said order, one of the petitioners therein i.e. petitioner No.1-Society has approached this Court with a request to initiate an action under the Contempt of Courts Act.

3.

During the course of hearing, the learned Counsel for the petitioner fairly concedes that now he has received a notice from the office of the respondent No.2 i.e. the Commissioner, Tribal Development, Maharashtra State, by asking him to remain present and the proceedings are now in progress.

2 cp121.24 4.

Since we find that the respondent authority has now taken proceedings for compliance of the order, we do not find any justification in initiating the proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act.

5.

The petition is, therefore, dismissed.

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