Prashant S/O Annasaheb Nalse And Others v. Shri Nand Kumar, The Secretary Deptt. Of School Education And Sports, Mumbai And Others

cp332.15 1/2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CONTEMPT PETITION NO.332 OF 2015 IN WRIT PETITION NO.3822 OF 2010 Prashant Nalse and ors -vsShri Nand Kumar, The Secretary, Department of School Education and Sports, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 and ors ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders.

or directions and Registrar's orders.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mr.Amit Bhate, counsel for the petitioners.

Mr.Nikhil Joshi, AGP for R-1 to 3.

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK & V. M. DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATE : MARCH 09, 2016.

Heard.

By this contempt petition, the petitioners seek action against the respondents for willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court on 8.4.2015, in Writ Petition No.3822 of 2010.

It is the case of the petitioners that despite the specific direction of this Court to complete the exercise and find out whether the petitioners could be given advantage of the earlier services within three months, the respondents had not completed the exercise, till the contempt petition was filed. Shri Nikhil Joshi, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 to 3 states, by relying on the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 to 3, that the order has been complied with though there is some delay in complying the same. It is stated that the State Government had directed the Commissioner,

cp332.15 2/2 Amravati Municipal Corporation and the Chief Executive Officer of the Zilla Parishad to decide the claims of the petitioners in pursuance of the directions issued by the Court on 8.4.2015. It is stated that since the guidelines in the Government Resolution were to be followed, some time required for compliance of the orders. It is stated that the delay caused in implementing the orders is due to administrative exigencies.

Shri Amit Bhate, learned counsel for the petitioners does not dispute that the directions in the order of which the contempt is alleged are complied with.

In view of the aforesaid, we dispose of the contempt petition with no order as to costs.

JUDGE JUDGE !! BRW !!