{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.12473 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.5265 OF 2008 Baliram Chandoba Kamble APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others RESPONDENTS ....... Mr. Nanasaheb N.Shinde, Advocate for applicant ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 22 nd April 2010 PER COURT: 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant. 2. It appears that Writ Petition No.5507/1007 was filed by defendants No.1 and 2 in Special Civil Suit No.16/2005 on the file of Civil Judge Senior Division, Parbhani, challenging the order dated 31.07.2007. By the said order, application filed by petitioners at Exhibit-59, defendants No.1 and 2 in the said suit, was rejected. It further appears that the said writ petition was disposed of on 11.01.2008 by this Court (Coram : Shri B.R.Gavai, J.). In para 10 of {2} the said order it is observed that - “It has further been held that the objection as to the admissibility of the document should be dealt with and decided at the time the affidavit with the document is produced and taken on record. It is not permissible for the Court to allow the documents produced along with affidavit and exhibit them without considering the objection of the other side.” It is further observed in para 11 that “In that view of the matter, I find that the learned trial court has grossly erred in passing the impugned order. As already discussed here in above, it was necessary for the learned trial court to have decided the question regarding admissibility of the said document before exhibiting the same. In that view of the matter, the impugned order dated 31st July 2007 is quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted back to the learned trial court to decide the application of the present petitioners below Exhibit-59 afresh, in accordance with law.”. 3. It appears that thereafter the application was heard afresh and the learned trial court, vide order dated 05.03.2008, again rejected the application, which order again came to be challenged before this Court in Writ Petition No.5265/2008. The said writ petition came to be disposed of by me vide order dated 02.07.2009. In the said order, in para 7, it is observed that - “7. From the observations of the trial court as stated above in the above referred para supra, it is clear that my brother Judge while disposing the earlier writ petition vide his order dated 11th January 2008, has {3} given directions to the learned trial court to decide first the objections on merit in accordance with law. These directions were not obeyed by learned Trial Court and has committed the same error which he has committed earlier while passing the order on the objection raised by the petitioners which was under challenge and subject matter of the earlier writ petition. Thus the fact is clear that it is a clear cut case of dis-obedience of the directions given by this Court, by the trial court. In the premise, the order dated 05/03/2008 is hereby quashed and set aside. The learned trial court Jt. Civil Judge, S.D. Parbhani (Shri.B.C.Kamble) is hereby warned that in future he has not to dis-obey the orders of the Higher Courts and in case it is noticed that the orders are dis-obeyed, then this Court will take serious view about the act and action of the Presiding Officer. Copy of this order be sent to the concerned judge for his notice and to take the caution in future.” 4. In para 8 of the said judgment, I have taken a note that the judgment delivered by the Full Bench of this Court, reported in 2008 (6) Mh.L.J. Page 886 in the matter of “Hemendra Rasiklal Ghia V/s Subodh Modi”, was circulated to all the Subordinate Judicial Officers in the State for guidance and how to deal with when the objections are raised in respect of production and admissibility and not to exhibit the said document. 5. It appears that as the copy of the judgment dated 02.07.2009 passed in Writ Petition No.5265/2008 was sent to the concerned Judge for notice and to take caution in future, the Judicial Officer Mr.Kamble Baliram Chandoba, filed a representation before the Administrative Committee of this Court {4} for permission to get the observations / remarks in para 7 of the judgment expunged. Within mean time the said judicial officer came to be transferred as Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kolhapur. The Administrative Committee has resolved to register the representation as a civil application and it was decided to permit the judicial officer to approach this Court to get the remarks expunged. As such this representation came up before this Court as civil application. 6. Thereafter, notice of the civil application No. 12473/2009 was issued to the applicant. In response to the said notice the Judicial Officer Mr.Kamble B.C. Appeared before this Court, through counsel Mr.N.N.Shinde. When the Civil Application is taken up for hearing, the applicant, Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kolhapur, Mr.B.C.Kamble, filed an affidavit contending that he never intended to flout the orders passed by this Court in writ petitions No.5507/2007 and Writ petition No.5265/2008. The applicant has also contended that now he has realized that this Court has given a warning not to disobey the orders of the Higher Courts and to take caution in future and this Court has not made any adverse remarks against him. He has further contended that as he has realized the mistake committed by him, he has tendered sincere apology and assured that he will take caution in future and will not commit the same mistake. The affidavit filed by the applicant is taken on record and marked as “X” for identification. {5} 7. Considering the contents of the affidavit and undertaking given, the apology tendered by the Judicial Officer Mr.Kamble B.C., is accepted and the observations made in para 7 of the judgment dated 02.07.2009 in writ petition No.5265/2008, which relates about the conduct of the applicant, are hereby expunged. Accordingly, the observations “The learned trial court Jt. Civil Judge, S.D. Parbhani (Shri.B.C.Kamble) is hereby warned that in future he has not to dis-obey the orders of the Higher Courts and in case it is noticed that the orders are dis-obeyed, then this Court will take serious view about the act and action of the Presiding Officer. Copy of this order be sent to the concerned judge for his notice and to take the caution in future.” be deleted from the judgment. 8. Civil application stands disposed of accordingly as allowed. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/B10/ca12473-09