Bombay High CourtCP/187/2015dispossed offdismiss for default

Suresh Balkrishna Lakhe v. Shri Vishwanath Giriraj, Principal Secty. To Govt. Rural Development And Jalsandharan Deptt., And 1

2016-10-17Hon'Ble Shri Justice Z.A. Haq2 pages

1 cp187.15

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CONTEMPT PETITION NO.187/2015 Suresh Balkrishna Lakhe ..Vs..

Shri Vishwanath Giriraj and another - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.

DATED : 17.10.2016.

Heard Shri M.R. Rajgure, Advocate for the petitioner.

The grievance of the petitioner is that the order passed by the Additional Commissioner on 22nd March, 2011 by which it was directed that the petitioner be reinstated has not been complied with in its spirit. According to the petitioner, though he was reinstated as per the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, increments payable to him from 2008 during the period of suspension were withheld, he was not given time-bound promotion and his claim for promotion was not considered. According to the petitioner, his arrears of salary are not paid and there is no justification for it. It is submitted that the petitioner has now retired on attaining the age of superannuation.

The grievance made by the petitioner cannot be considered in contempt petition. This is not a fit case to invoke the powers under Contempt of Courts Act,

2 cp187.15 1971. The petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy available in law to seek redressal of his grievance.

JUDGE Tambaskar.