1 Bsb IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 264 OF 2008 Smt.Usha Vithal Gavhane ... Petitioner v/s Dr.Babasaheb Kadam, Jt.Director of Higher Education, & ors. ... Respondents Nobody present for the petitioner. Mr.A.b.Avhad for the respondent/contemnor. Mr.A.I.I.Patel, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.3 and 4. CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: 6TH NOVEMBER, 2009 P.C.: 1. Nobody appears for the petitioner. 2. The petition has been filed since according to the petitioner, there is a breach of the order passed by this Court on 27.2.2007 directing the respondent No.2 in the petition that the pay bills claiming 50% of the back wages payable to the petitioner from the date of the termination till the date of the order should be prepared and forwarded to the Joint 2 Director, Higher Education. The Joint Director of Higher Education i.e. respondent No.1 was further directed to consider the petitioner’s claim and take a decision in accordance with law. 3. It appears that the petitioner has been paid 50% of the back wages according to the pay bills which were forwarded by the Principal to the Joint Director of Higher Education. 4. An affidavit has been filed by the petitioner contending that the amount which has been paid is far less than the amount paid to another lecturer in the senior college and, therefore, she was entitled to be paid much more. 5. In my opinion, this cannot be a case for contempt as there is a bonafide dispute as to whether the petitioner is entitled to the amount that she has already been paid or to the salary which has been paid to one Dhanaji Baban Mane. who is appointed as a lecturer in the senior college w.e.f. 1.9.1990 and is getting a salary of Rs.35,024/-. 6. The contempt petition therefore stands dismissed. 7. Notice issued earlier stands discharged. ..... 3 4