RAMCHANDRA LAXMAN SANKHE Vs. PRESIDENT ARYAN EDUCATION SOCIETY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Counsel appearing for the parties. The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner states that Presiding Officer, Additional School Tribunal, Mumbai in Appeal No.228 of 1997, passed final order on 30-9-1998 in favour of the Petitioner. According to the learned Counsel for the Petitioner the said order was challenged by the Respondent no.4 Dharamsing Narsing Jadhav, by filing Writ Petition No.5533 of 1998 in this Court, wherein Rule was initially granted on October 15, 1998. The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner points out that the order passed by the learned Additional Presiding Officer, School Tribunal was communicated to the management as well as Head Master and was also brought to the notice of Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, Thane. However, the same is not complied with. The learned Advocate for the Petitioner has further submitted that Writ Petition No.5533 of 1998 ultimately after hearing the parties, came to be dismissed and disposed of by this Court by the judgment and order dated March 4, 1999 and Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, New Mumbai was directed to take up the hearing of the appeal afresh.

(2.) THE learned Counsel for the Petitioner has fairly submitted that the said appeal after remand came to be dismissed by the learned Presiding Officer of the School Tribunal and thereafter writ petition which was filed in this Court also came to be withdrawn with liberty to take appropriate proceedings before the School Tribunal. The learned Counsel for the petitioner ultimately states that though he could not succeed, he is entitled to get monetary benefits of the order passed by the learned Presiding Officer in Appeal No.228 of 1997. According to the learned Counsel for the Petitioner therefore the petition is filed and prosecuted against the Respondent for contempt of order passed by the learned Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Mumbai dated 30-9-1998.

(3.) I have seen the judgment of this Court in the matter of Vilas Shankarrao Deshmukh and Anr. Vs. S.A. Ghode, Principal, Navprabhat Vidya Mandir and Junior College, Thanegaon and Ors. reported in 2001 (1) Mh.L.J. 261, as well as in the matter of Mohammad Salam Anamul Haque Vs. S.A. Azmi and Ors. reported in 2001 (1) Mah.L.J 249. Apart from these judgments in my view, there is no case made out by the present Petitioner, within the meaning of Section 2(b) of Contempt of Court Act, 1971 and therefore the present contempt petition is meritless. Hence the Contempt petition filed by the Petitioner is dismissed and disposed of accordingly. Rule discharged. No order as to costs.