1 (CP 250 of 2009) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.250 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.2685 OF 1995 Kahum Rahimhakahs Mujawar...Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents ----- Mr.Ashok M. Joshi for Petitioner Mr. A.I. Patel – AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 Mr.S.S. Patwardhan for Respndent No.4 ----- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED: 6TH JANUARY, 2011 P.C. 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, learned AGP for the State and the learned Counsel for the Respondent No.4. 2. This Contempt Petition has been filed by the Petitioner alleging that the Respondent No.4 has committed contempt and by not following the directions given by the Division Bench of this Court 2 (CP 250 of 2009) dated 28th April, 2006 in Writ Petition No. 2685 of 1995. By the said order, the Division Bench of this Court in paragraph 4 had directed the Respondents that he should be paid his monthly salary in the prescribed pay scale as applicable to the aided schools within a period of six months from that date of the order. The Petitioner, thereafter, filed another petition vide Writ Petition No.7007 of 2006 which was admitted by this Court by order dated 7th April, 2007 and an interim relief in terms of prayer clause (f) was granted. Thereafter, this contempt petition has been filed in 2009. The affidavit in the contempt petition was affirmed on 15th March, 2009. An affidavit in reply has been filed by the Learned AGP, in which he has stated that pursuant to the directions given by the Court, the Respondent No.4 has already made payment of arrears of salary due and payable to the Petitioner. The particulars regarding payment made has been 3 (CP 250 of 2009) mentioned in the said affidavit in reply. The grievance of the Petitioner is firstly that the said payment is not as per the VIth Pay Commission and secondly, as per the scale which is prescribed for aided schools. 3. Shri Patwardhan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.4 submits that the prayer in the petition was that the payment should be made as per the IVth Pay Commission and, therefore, there was no question of making payment to the Petitioner VIth Pay Commission. 4. After having heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and the Respondents, in my view, since the Respondent No.4 has already made payment as directed by this Court by six cheques aggregating to Rs.5,25,762/- which were credited to the Savings Account No.7877 of the Petitioner, the order 4 (CP 250 of 2009) passed by this Court has been complied with. 5. So far as the grievance of the Petitioner is concerned, firstly, that an additional amount of Rs.3 lacs is payable to him according to the pay scale which is applicable to him; and secondly, that the salary is payable to him according to the VIth Pay Commission. These two questions are disputed questions and therefore, that would give rise to a separate cause of action which cannot be decided in this contempt petition. The Petitioner is always at liberty to take out an appropriate proceedings before the appropriate Forum or suitably amend the second petition which is filed by him in this Court. 6. So far as contempt which is alleged in the contempt petition is concerned, firstly, the said contempt petition has been filed after the period of limitation, prescribed under section 20 of the Limitation 5 (CP 250 of 2009) Act is over; and secondly, there has been substantial compliance of the order passed by this Court. The apology tendered by the Respondents for late payment made by them to the Petitioner is accepted. It is, therefore, not possible to entertain the contempt petition. Contempt Petition is, therefore, dismissed. (V.M. KANADE J.)