Dnyandeo Waman Choudhari v. Sunil Patil The Plantation Officer Social Forestry Range And Others

- 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONT. PETITION NO. 674 OF 2022 IN WP/2949/2003 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9607 OF 2025 IN CP/674/2022 Dnyandeo Waman Choudhari ....Petitioner

VERSUS

Kailas Mogal Ahire & another .....Respondents Mr. V. Y. Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. B. B. Bhise, AGP for the State.

CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT, J.

DATE : 4th DECEMBER, 2025.

PER COURT :

1.

It is strangely seen that despite of several orders, the orders of this Court are not obeyed under the pretext of policy decision of the Government. The Government was heard when the Petition was decided and it is only upon hearing parties the orders are passed. Even in the Contempt Petition, this Court is passing orders since February 2025 in the presence of the officer only under the hope that this Court would not be required to pass any strict orders against the authorities. However, it is seen that the authorities are still not acting upon the orders.

- 2 - 2.

Mr. Rushikesh Rajan, Chief Conservator of Forest, is present today. He informs that the proposal for sanction is already sent to the Additional Chief Secretary (forest) on 17.06.2025 and the same is still pending. There is also a reminder sent on 27.11.2025. It is a case of inaction on the part of the said officer as a result of which the sanction order could not be issued.

3.

Today, affidavit verified by Mr. Rushikesh Ranjan is placed on record. Along with the affidavit, a communication dated 27.11.2025 sending reminder regarding the proposal specifically mentioning that it is in respect of Contempt of Courts Act, is annexed. 4.

It is seen from the earlier order dated 08.04.2025 that an undertaking was to be filed within one week by the concerned officer that sanction would be granted. Prior to that, there is order dated 25.02.2025 wherein a statement is made that the amount would be paid within six weeks from the date of the order. Even that amount is not paid till today. It is seen that the proposal is pending with the Government. From the communication dated 17.11.2025 it is seen that there is specific reference of the present Contempt Petition. It is

- 3 - anguishing to see that inspite of all this, the authorities are still not acting pursuant to the various orders passed by this Court. 5.

In view of this, learned Advocate for the contempt petitioner seeks to add Mr. Milind Mhaiskar, ACS (forest) as party respondent. 6.

Leave granted. Amendment be carried out within one week from today.

7.

Issue notice to the added Respondent returnable on 18.12.2025, with notice even the order passed by this Court in present Contempt Petition also be served upon the Respondent. Hamdast allowed.

(KISHORE C. SANT) Judge dyb