Bombay High Court
Hadapsar Industrial Estate ... vs The President, Pune Contonment Board ... on 11 December, 2018
Bench: K.K. Tated, N.J. Jamadar
spb/ 26cp16292-18.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CONTEMPT PETITION (st.) NO. 16292 OF 2018
IN
W. P. NO. 96 of 1999
Hadapsar Industrial Estate ... Petitioner.
V/s.
The President, Pune Cantonment Board ... Respondents.
& Ors.
And
Mrs. Manisha Mhaiskar Patankar ... Contemnor.
---
Mr. S. M. Gorwadkar, Senior Counsel i/by Niranjan Mogre, Mr.
A. P. Vanarase, AGP for the State- Respondent No. 7 & 9.
---
CORAM : K.K. TATED & N.J. JAMADAR,JJ.
DATE : DECEMBER 11, 2018.
PC :
1 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2 By this contempt petition, the petitioner alleged that though this court vide order dated 20.07.2016 passed in writ petition no. 96 of 1999 directed the Respondents to take decision as per clause (ii) of para 30 of the order, within six months, they failed to do so. Clause (ii) of para 30 of the order dated 20.07.2016 reads thus :Borey 1/3 ::: Uploaded on - 18/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 27/12/2018 05:04:09 :::
spb/ 26cp16292-18.odt "(ii) The Secretary-in-charge of the Urban Development Department of the Respondent No. 7 to decide whether the said garbage dump is a suitable land within the meaning of Rules 11 and 12 and Schedule-I of the said Rules of 2016. This decision be taken within a period of 6 months from the date of communication of this order."
3 Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that as per the order passed by this court, they made representation to Respondents, calling upon the Principal Secretary, (UD -II), Urban Development Dept. (UDD), Mantralaya, to comply with the order passed by this court. Again, the Petitioner sent reminder dated 15.01.2017 to Respondent No.9. The Respondents failed and neglected to comply the order dated 20.07.2016 and, therefore, the Petitioner filed the present contempt petition in this court on 03.07.2018. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner further submits that after filing of the contempt petition,the Respondent took decision on 11.09.2018. He submits that the decision was taken by Respondents after more than 2 years and that there is no explanation for the said delay. Thus the Respondents have committed the contempt of court.
4 Learned AGP submits that the Respondents undertake to file affidavit-in-reply, explaining the delay of Borey 2/3 ::: Uploaded on - 18/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 27/12/2018 05:04:09 ::: spb/ 26cp16292-18.odt more than two years in complying the order passed by this court dated 20.07.2016. He requests for some time.
5 Affidavit-in-reply to be filed on or before 18.12.2018 with copy to the other side.
6 At the request of the learned AGP, the Registry is directed to place the matter on board on 20.12.2018.
(N.J. JAMADAR, J.) (K. K. TATED,J.)
.....
Borey 3/3
::: Uploaded on - 18/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 27/12/2018 05:04:09 :::