Narayan Vithoba Otari v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary
by SUNNY ANKUSHRAO THOTE Date:
2025.07.19 09:53:41 +0530 SUNNY ANKUSHRAO THOTE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
(915) CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 228 OF 2025 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 4938 OF 2021 Uttam Shahurao Kalase & Ors.
...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
...Respondents
AND
(916) CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 229 OF 2025 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 15510 OF 2022 Ratnakar Chandrakant Lokhande & Ors.
...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
...Respondents
AND
(917) CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 230 OF 2025 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2543 OF 2022 Ramesh Ramkrushna Patki & Ors.
...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
...Respondents
AND
(918) CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 231 OF 2025 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 4995 OF 2021 Narayan Vithoba Otari
...Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
...Respondents
AND
(919) CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 418 OF 2025 IN CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 57 OF 2025 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 4938 OF 2021 Vitthal Ramrao Garad & Ors.
...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
...Respondents
Mr. Sanjaykumar B. Bhosale, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. G.P. a/w Mr. V.M. Mali, AGP for the Respondent State in CP/228/2025.
Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. G.P. a/w Ms. N.M. Mehra, AGP for the Respondent State in CP/229/2025.
Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. G.P. a/w Ms. P.N. Diwan, AGP for the Respondent State in CP/230/2025.
Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. G.P. a/w Mr. S.H. Kankal, AGP for the Respondent State in CP/231/2025.
Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. G.P. a/w Mr. A.K. Naik, AGP for the Respondent State in CP/418/2025.
Mr. Vijay Killedar a/w Ms. Priyanka Chavan, Advocate for Respondent Nos.3 & 4 in all Petitions.
Mr. Kuldip Jangam, The Chief Executive Officer, Z.P. Solapur, present.
Mr. Smita Patil, The Dy. Chief Executive Officer, Z.P. Solapur, present.
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, JJ.
DATE : 16th JULY, 2025
P.C. :- 1.
These Contempt Petitions are not for the first time that the Petitioners have filed. One such Contempt Petition is filed in a Contempt Petition filed earlier. Respondent No.3, Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and Respondent No.4, Deputy CEO, are before us in all these Contempt Petitions. Both were not arrayed as contemnors in the earlier Contempt Petitions, which were disposed off on 18th February, 2025 on a statement made by one of the present contemnors. As a matter of fact, Respondent Nos.3 and 4 were in their office even six months prior to our order dated 18th February, 2025.
2.
The Writ Order dated 4th July, 2022, need not be adverted to once again. Suffice it to say, that directions had been issued to the Zilla Parishad authorities to ensure that the recovered amount/unpaid amounts would be refunded/paid. When the earlier Contempt Petitions were heard on 18th February, 2025, the learned Advocate for the Zilla Parishad, Solapur was issued with written instructions dated 17th February, 2025 under the signature of Respondent No.4, Deputy CEO. One more letter was issued to the learned Advocate dated 18th February, 2025 by the same Deputy
CEO with a copy to the CEO. It intrigues us that the CEO has tried to keep himself away from these proceedings. He was not even issuing letters either to the Advocate or for ensuring that the orders are implemented expeditiously.
3.
This is prima facie visible from the fact that the Deputy CEO is made to address the learned Advocate. These two aforesaid documents clearly indicated to the learned Advocate who made a statement before this Court earlier, that the recovered amount from one of the Petitioners would be returned to him within seven days. The seven days expired on 24th February, 2024. Until today, Rs.13,000/- is returned to the said Petitioner, Mr. P.N. Shete, in April, 2025. The remaining amount was returned on 8th July, 2025, after contempt notice was issued on 1st July, 2025 in the second Contempt Petition, and the learned Advocate waived service on behalf of Respondent Nos.3 and 4.
4.
Until today, when called upon, Respondent Nos.3 and 4 are only pointing out various files and internal notings to indicate as to the steps they have taken. Both of them are labouring under the impression that the undertaking given in the first contempt proceeding (to implement the directions within seven days), for
which we had granted 30 days on our own, was a compliance of the order. Narration of what has been done by the officers, by running papers and files from one department to another or one table to another, is not an acceptable explanation, while dealing with a second contempt of Court proceedings. Prima facie, the record reveals that the Writ orders are not complied with, despite having been granted opportunities in the first Contempt Petitions. 5.
In view of the above, we are framing the following charges :- (i) Do the Petitioners prove that Respondent Nos.3 and 4 are guilty of wilful, intentional and deliberate disobedience of the order of this Court dated 4th July, 2022, passed in Writ Petition No.4938 of 2021, as well as the order dated 18th February, 2025, passed in Contempt Petition No.57 of 2025 ?
(ii) If yes, are Respondent Nos.3 and 4 entitled for pardon ? (iii) If the answer to Charge No. (ii) is in the negative, what should be the punishment to be awarded to these two Respondents/Contemnors ?
6.
Respondent Nos.3 and 4 are at liberty to face these charges by filing additional affidavit in reply, if desired, within a period of 21 days from today.
7.
At this juncture, the learned Advocate representing Respondent Nos.3 and 4 submits that by Tuesday, 22nd July, 2025, the payments would be transferred in the accounts of these Petitioners. That the order would be complied with in letter and spirit.
8.
In view of the said statement, we are listing these Petitions on 22nd July, 2025 at 3:00 p.m.
(GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)