1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Contempt Petition No. 143/2006 in Writ Petition No. 3326/2004 (decided) Ms. Varsha Pundlikrao Mandhare ..vs.. Arjunrao Shripatrao Kasture and anr. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders Mr. A. A. Naik, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. S. A. Mohta, Advocate for respondent nos. 1 and 2. Coram: R. K. Deshpande, J. Date : March 23, 2010 1. This contempt petition complains about willful disobedience of judgment and order dated 18.08.2005 passed by Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 3326/2004. This Court had held that the appointment of the petitioner was in clear and permanent post and she was duly qualified for the same and hence her termination was set aside. Mr. Naik, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that in spite of this, services of the petitioner were terminated on the same ground, which were foreclosed by judgment delivered by this Court. Hence, there is a contempt and willful disobedience/breach of the order passed by this Court. 2 2. It is not in dispute that subsequent termination of the petitioner was challenged by her by filing appeal before the School Tribunal, wherein specific ground was raised that termination was contrary to the findings recorded by this Court in judgment dated 18.08.2005 delivered in Writ Petition No. 3326/2004. That appeal was allowed setting aside the termination order. Against that, writ petition was preferred and the same had also been dismissed. Against which, Special Leave Petition has been preferred, which is pending before the Apex Court. 3. In view of the aforesaid factual background, it is apparent that the termination of the petitioner has been set aside by School Tribunal on the grounds, one of which was that it is contrary to the judgment and order dated 18.08.2005 passed in Writ Petition No. 3326/2004. The matter arising out of that is sub judice before the Hon’ble Apex Court. If the termination of the petitioner is upheld ultimately in the Apex Court, then in that event, the question of contempt may not arise and if the termination of the petitioner ultimately stands set aside, then in that event the petitioner has already been reinstated in services, pursuant 3 to the said order. 4. In view of the aforesaid position, I do not find any question of willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court. The Contempt Petition is, therefore, dismissed. No order as to costs. J UDGE kahale