Shri Sitaram Maharaj Sansthan, Walgaon, Thr. Trustee Shri Anand Prasad Laxminivas Ganeriwal v. Shri. Shridhar Pawar S/O Late Shri Keshavraoji Khushalraoji Pawar And Others

(1) 1caw3117.25

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION (CAW) NO.3117/2025 IN WRIT PETITION NO.7276/2019 Shri Sitaram Maharaj Sansthan, Walgaon .Vs. Shridhar Pawar s/o Late Shri Keshavraoji Khushalraoji Pawar and Ors.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. V. Sharma, Advocate for applicant.

Mr. K. R. Lule, A.P.P. for non applicant.

CORAM :

ANIL L. PANSARE AND NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, JJ.

DATE :

JANUARY 7, 2026.

Applicant - petitioner has approached this Court seeking direction against respondent No.1 - Sub Divisional Officer, Amravati to decide pending Revenue Case No.1/59(32)/Walgaon/2012-13, within a time bound period, preferably within three months. 2.

The petition was disposed of vide order dated 16.02.2024, in following terms:

"There is already an order by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No.1318/2020, dated 31/1/2024, directing expeditious decision of the proceeding in Revenue Case No.1/59(32)/Walgaon/ 2012-2013, considering which since the petition seeks expeditious disposal of the same, the grievance already stands redressed."

3.

As could be seen, Division Bench took note of the fact that learned Single Judge of this Court, in another writ petition viz. Writ Petition No.1318/2020 had, vide its order dated 31.01.2024, directed to decide expeditiously the revenue case under question. Taking note of such a direction, the Division Bench opined that the grievance of the petitioner stood redressed because the petitioner's request was for expeditious disposal of the revenue case, which is pending for last more than 12-13 years.

(2) 1caw3117.25 4.

Despite the directions issued by learned Single Judge, the revenue proceedings have been not decided.

5.

We have accordingly requested the learned A.P.P. to take instructions, which the learned A.P.P. has taken and placed before us a communication issued by non applicant - Sub Divisional Office, Amravati saying that the proceeding is closed for order on an application made by the intervenor. The communication further indicates that because of ensuing election of the Municipal Corporation, order will be passed on 23.01.2026. Thereafter, the parties will be heard and then final decision will be taken. 6.

The communication is taken on record and marked Article 'X' for identification.

7.

It appears to us that the respondent has failed to act in terms of the order passed by learned Single Judge as also the order passed by Division Bench. The tone and tenor of the communication indicates that non applicant has no intention to decide the proceeding expeditiously. Rather, the communication indicates extreme casual approach in processing the proceeding. The act appears to us, though prima facie, contemptuous. 8.

Issue Contempt Notice in Form I, Chapter XXXIX of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960, to non applicant - Sub Divisional Officer, Amravati, returnable on 21.01.2026. (JUDGE) (JUDGE) Kahale