Santosh S/O Gopichand Dhok v. Shri. Jitendera Pappadkar, The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Chandrapur And Others

903 CP 262-2017.odt 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.

CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 262 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 6838 OF 2016(D) Santosh S/o Gopichand Dhok Vs.

Shri Jitendera Pappadkar, The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Chandrapur and others ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court'

s or Judge'

s Order Coram, appearances, Court'

s Orders or directions and Registrar'

s order Shri N.W. Almelkar, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. CORAM :- A.S.CHANDURKAR AND N.B.SURYAWANSHI, JJ.

DATED :- DECEMBER 10, 2020.

There has been no appearance on behalf of the petitioner since last two dates. The grievance of the petitioner is with regard to non-compliance of the directions issued by this Court in Writ Petition No.6838 of 2016 by which he was granted leave to make an appropriate representation to the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Chandrapur so as to receive benefits of the welfare scheme that was operating in the year 2014-15.

After notice was issued reply has been filed by the respondents pointing out that the petitioner was required to file a fresh application for claiming subsidy. Accordingly on 20/11/2019 the petitioner was permitted to file a fresh

903 CP 262-2017.odt 2 application claiming subsidy for purchasing bullocks and a bullock-cart. Such application was moved on 27/11/2019.

The learned counsel for the respondents submits that in the meanwhile the scheme for the year 2014-15 has come to an end and it is now replaced by a new scheme called Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Agriculture Self Reliance Scheme 2017-18. Though, the petitioner was informed to make an application under the new scheme, such fresh application under the new Scheme has not been made.

In view of the fact that the earlier Scheme of the year 2014-15 under which the petitioner was seeking benefit has itself come to an end, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the present proceedings pending. There is no willful breach or non-compliance of any order. By observing that the petitioner is free to seek financial assistance under the prevailing Scheme in accordance with law, the contempt petition is disposed of. No costs.

JUDGE JUDGE J.Pethe..