Sudarshan Raghav Shetty v. Dipesh Brikishor Nirupam

8-CP-749-2025.DOC Digitally signed by PRASHANT VILAS RANE Date:

2025.12.11 15:10:45 +0530 PRASHANT VILAS RANE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.749 OF 2025 IN WRIT PETITION NO.11810 OF 2025 Sudarshan Raghav Shetty

...Petitioner

VS Dipesh Brikishor Nirupam

...Respondent

_________ Mr. Ahooja Mukesh Harbanslal, for Petitioner. MS. M. s. Bane, AGP for State.

Mr. D. R. Kawale i/b. Komal Punjabi, for Respondent No.3-BMC. Mr. Jitendra Ghode, Asstt. Engineer (Market) present. __________

CORAM:

G. S. KULKARNI & AARTI SATHE, JJ.

DATE:

09 DECEMBER 2025.

P.C.

1.

This Contempt Petition is filed alleging the contempt of the order dated 17 September 2025 passed by this Court whereby the respondent-Assistant Commissioner of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation was directed to decide the petitioner's representation dated 2 May 2025. The relevant extract of the order is required to be noted which reads thus:

"3.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, keeping open all contentions of the petitioner, we direct the Assistant Commissioner, Market (Ward) to decide the petitioner's representation dated 02 May 2025 along with any other representations made by the petitioner. The petitioner is also permitted to file additional written submissions along with the documents setting out his bonafides and the reliefs he intends to obtain from the Municipal Corporation within two weeks from today.

4.

Let a personal hearing be granted to the petitioner by the Assistant Commissioner, Market (Ward) who shall proceed to pass an order on such representation as expeditiously as possible and in any event within a period of six weeks. The petitioner is directed to appear at the first instance before the Assistant Commissioner on 23 September 2025 at 03.00 p.m., so that a further appropriate date to hear the petitioner can be fixed. 5.

Needless to observe that all the materials which would be placed by the petitioner before the Assistant Commissioner shall be taken into consideration and a reasoned order shall be passed on the petitioner's grievances. All remedies of the petitioner are expressly kept open.

09 December 2025 P. V. Rane

8-CP-749-2025.DOC 6.

The writ petition is disposed of keeping open all contentions of the parties. No costs."

2.

Learned Counsel for the Municipal Corporation has placed on record an order dated 5 December 2025 passed by the Assistant Commissioner deciding the said representation of the petitioner. In this view of the matter, we are of the opinion that as the orders stands complied, the Contempt Petition would not require further adjudication. It is accordingly disposed of, however, keeping open all contentions of the parties in regard to order dated 5 December 2025 to take recourse to appropriate proceedings in the event the petitioner is of the opinion that he is aggrieved by the said order.

3.

Disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No costs. (AARTI SATHE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.) 09 December 2025 P. V. Rane