AYODHYA PRASAD SONI Vs. TULSI BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, the petitioner seeks conviction and award of sentence against the respondent.

(2.) UNDISPUTEDLY , in M.P. No. 226/1987 the High Court of Madhya Pradesh vide its judgment dt. 4-7-2000 allowed the petition filed by the petitioner and directed that respondent No. 1 to reinstate the petitioner if not otherwise disentitled on the post.

(3.) UNFORTUNATELY the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner loses sight of subsection (3) of Section 30 of the Act. Subsection (3) provides that "Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-sections (1) and (2) of this section or in section 23, but save as hereinafter provided, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh shall have, and the High Court of Chhattisgarh shall not have, jurisdiction to entertain, hear or dispose of appeals, applications for leave to the Supreme Court, applications for review and other proceedings where any such proceedings seek any relief in respect of any order passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh before the appointed day." The words "that the High Court of Chhattisgarh shall not have jurisdiction to entertain, hear or dispose of any matter where the proceedings seek any relief in respect of any order passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh before the appointed day", are the key-words.