1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO.119/2010 [Civil] In WP/5669/2009 (Dr.Sujata Asaram Salve vs. Smt.Vandana Krushna and others) -------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Court’s or Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Judge’s or directions and Registrar’s orders Orders Mr.N.C.Garud, Adv., for the petitioner. Mr. V.B.Ghatge, AGP for respondent State. Mr. V.S.Bedre, Adv., for respondent no.4. ... CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE:18/11/2010 1. Heard. In Writ Petition No. 5669/2009, dt.14th Oct.,2009, the Division Bench stayed the order of termination dt. 31.8.2009 and, consequently, it is informed that the petitioner herein is accommodated with the Municipal Corporation, thereby staying the order dt31.8.2009. 2. It is informed, the order of the Division Bench is tested 2 by the respondent Municipal Corporation before the Apex Court, however, there operates no stay to the directions of the Division Bench. 3. Mr.Garud, learned Counsel informs that the order of the Division Bench is partially complied with as petitioner is reinstated, however, her wages for at least approximately 14 months are yet to be paid. 4. Mr.Bedre, learned Counsel, submits, the necessary papers are forwarded to the Secretary, Health Department, Government of Maharashtra and also to other competent authorities to release the wages and for absorbing the petitioner in the Corporation and the matter is pending with the Government. 5. Mr. Bedre, learned Counsel, is unable to make any 3 statement about release of payment of dues in favour of the petitioner for want of instructions. 6. Though I find the Division Bench did not specifically direct the respondent therein – the Municipal Corporation, Ahmednagar, respondent no.4, the basic liability will be on the said respondent no.4 to release the wages. The parties are at liberty to move the Division Bench to get clarification to this effect, however, for the present, I do not find that there is breach of the orders dt.14th Oct.,2009 recorded by the Division Bench. Contempt Petition lacks merit, dismissed. No costs. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE ... AGP/119-10cp