1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 191 OF 2008 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 3091 /2006 (Decided) (Nitin s/o Laxman Ashtikar & ors. Vs. D.B. Gangalwar) Appeal District : Application No. of 200 Writ petition Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. Mr. S.R. Narnaware, Adv. for the petitioners. Ms. Tanna h/f Mr. R.S. Sundaram, Adv. for R-Sole. CORAM : Smt. Vasanti A. Naik, J. DATED : 9 th JANUARY, 2009. By this petition, the petitioners seek an action against the respondent for committing a contempt of the order passed by the division bench of this Court on 14th August, 2007 in Writ Petition No. 3091/2006. The petitioners are appointed as Postal Assistants against the post reserved for the Scheduled Tribe category candidates. By the notices dated 18/5/2006 issued by the respondent, the petitioners were asked to submit their Scheduled Tribe Caste Validity Certificates, within a period of one month, failing which the services of the petitioners would stand terminated without any further notice. The notices dated 18/5/2006 were challenged by the petitioners before the division 2 bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 3091/2006 on the ground that the respondent could not have terminated the services of the petitioners without any further notice in case they failed to produce their Caste Validity Certificates within one month. Since during the pendency of the Writ Petition No. 3091/2006, the respondent had withdrawn the communications dated 18/5/2006, by the communication dated 13/6/2007, the petition was disposed of as infructuous by the order dated 14th August, 2007. After the disposal of the petition by the order dated 14th August, 2007, the respondent issued notices to the petitioners on 28/8/2008 asking the petitioners to produce certain certificates and supply certain omissions which were necessary for determining their caste claims. It was stated in the notices dated 28/8/2008 that though the petitioners were asked to supply the omissions by earlier communications and reminders, the omissions were not supplied. The respondent, therefore, asked the petitioners to comply with the requirements for verifying the caste claims, on or before 15/9/2008, failing which it would be presumed that the petitioners were not interested in verification of the caste claim, from the appropriate authority and the necessary action would be taken 3 against them. It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent could not have issued the notices dated 28/8/2008, when they had withdrawn the earlier notices dated 18/5/2006 and the petition was disposed of as infructuous in view of the withdrawal of the show cause notice dated 18/5/2006. It is the case of the petitioners that the withdrawal of the earlier notices was in the nature of an undertaking before the Court and, therefore, the issuance of subsequent notices dated 28/8/2008 was unwarranted and in utter disregard to the order passed by the division bench of this Court on 14th August, 2007. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the respondent has flouted the order passed by the division bench of this Court on 14th of August, 2007, by issuing the notices dated 28/8/2008. It is submitted on behalf of the respondent by the learned counsel that the earlier notices terminating the services of the petitioners on non- fulfillment of the condition of supplying the omissions. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the necessary documents were sent to the competent authority for verifying the caste claim of the petitioners and since the petitioners had not supplied certain necessary documents the competent authority had returned the proposal. The 4 respondent, in this background, issued the notices/communications dated 28/8/2008 to the petitioners stating therein that on their failure to supply the omissions, necessary action would be taken against the petitioners. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the respondent cannot be said to have flouted the order passed by the division bench of this Court on 14th August, 2007 in the aforesaid facts and circumstances. I have considered the submissions made on behalf of the parties and have also perused the order passed by the division bench of this Court on 14th August, 2007. It is not the case that the petition was withdrawn by the petitioners in view of the withdrawal of the notice dated 18/5/2006, unconditionally by the respondent. Since the notices dated 18/5/2006 were withdrawn, the division bench of this Court observed that nothing survived in the writ petition and the petition was disposed of. It, thus, appears that though the petitioners were appointed on the posts reserved for Scheduled Tribes candidates and the proposal for verification of Scheduled Tribes Caste Certificates and certifying its validity, was forwarded by the respondent to the Maharashtra Rajya Sahkari Adivasi Vikas Mahamandal Maryadit, Nagpur, the authority for verifying the genuineness of the 5 Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Caste Certificates, on 11/7/2005, the said authority had returned the proposal of the petitioners sent by the respondent, in view of non-supply of certain omissions in cases of the petitioners, and hence, the notices dated 28/8/2008 were issued. In the facts of the case, by no stretch of imagination, it could be said that the respondent has flouted the order passed by the division bench of this Court on 14th August, 2007. It appears that the petitioners do not desire that their caste claim be verified and hence have filed this contempt petition. In the result, the contempt petition is dismissed with costs. JUDGE RMP