1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR Contempt Petition No. 211 OF 2009 Mr. Bhaskar Atmaramji Gade, Aged about 49 years, Occu. Peon, R/o C/o Shri B.J.Gawi's House, Plot NO.24, Amar Colony, Old Bye pass Road, Amravati, Tah. And Distt. Amravati. .....Petitioners ..vs.. 1] Kishor Narayanrao Borkar, President, Apang Jiwan Vikas Sanstha, Nawathe Nagar, Amravati, Tah. and Dist. Amravati 2] Mr. Prakash Ajabrao Thakare, Aged about 47 years, Occu.: Clerk, in Sant Gadge Maharaj Vidyalaya, Nawathe Nagar, Amravati, Tah. and Dist. Amravati 3] Ku. Maya Narayanrao Borkar, Head Mistress, Sant Gadge Maharaj Vidyalaya, Nawathe Nagar, Amravati, Tah. and Dist. Amravati 4] Mr.S. K. Pawar, Education Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Amravati, Tah. and Dist. Amravati 5] Mr. A.N.Dongare, Joint Director of Vocational Education and Training, Amravati Region, Amravati, Tah. and Dist. Amravati. ....Respondents =-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- 2 Mr. G.R.Sadar, Advocate for the Applicant Mr. A.S.Kilor, Advocate for Respondents Nos.1 to 3. C ORAM : Smt.R.P.SondurBaldota, J. DATED : 19th January, 2010. 1. This contempt petition is filed under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, alleging that respondents have acted in deliberate defiance of the order dated 27th April, 2009 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 2023 of 2005. 2. Petitioner is a Class-IV employee serving as Peon in the school run by respondent No.1-management under the supervision of respondent No.4. Respondent No.3 is the Head Mistress. Respondent No.2 is a Clerk appointed on promotion. Respondent No.2 was also working as a Peon in the same school, who has been promoted to the post of Clerk. Respondent Nos.4 and 5 are Education Officer and the Joint Director of Vocational Education and Training, Amravati Region, Amravati, respectively. 3. Petitioner and respondent No.2 were appointed as Peon in the school run by respondent No.1 3 management since 1st July, 1986. In the year 1995, respondent no.1 had issued an advertisement for filling the post of Junior Clerk in the school, which was shown to have been reserved for Other Backward Class category. The petitioner, instead of filing an application pursuant to the advertisement, had made a representation on the basis of his seniority to be promoted to the post of Clerk. Respondent No.2, however, had applied pursuant to the advertisement and came to be promoted and appointed to the post, though he was one level junior to the petitioner in service. 4. Aggrieved by the appointment of respondent no.2, petitioner filed an appeal before the School Tribunal, challenging both, issuance of the advertisement as well as appointment of respondent No.2. The School Tribunal dismissed the appeal by its judgment and order dated 6th September, 2004. The petitioner then filed Writ Petition No. 2023 of 2005 challenging the order of dismissal of the appeal. By order dated 27th July, 2009, the writ petition was disposed of setting aside the order of the School Tribunal and directing respondents no.1 and 3 to consider the case of petitioner along with respondent no.2 or other 4 similarly situated candidates for promotion irrespective of the advertisement, which had been issued or interviews which had been held and if he was found fit, promote the petitioner and consider granting of benefit from such date as may be permitted. The exercise was to be completed by respondents no.1 and 3 under the order within a period of one month. It appears that, thereafter respondent no.3 by letter dated 21st August, 2009, asked the petitioner to attend the written test and the interview, held on 25th August, 2009 at 11.00 a.m. & 3.00 p.m. respectively. There were five other candidates, including respondent no.2, who were similarly called for the test and interview. The petitioner, despite receipt of the communication, failed and neglected to appear for both the tests. The other candidates appeared for the tests and were evaluated for their performances. Then, respondent no.1 in its meeting of the School Committee considered the performance of all the candidates contending for the promotion and found that respondent no.2 had secured highest aggregate marks in the tests and decided to promote him. This decision was communicated to petitioner by respondent no.1 by its letter dated 31st 5 August, 2009, a xerox copy of which is annexed to the petition. About two months thereafter, i.e. on 16/11/2009, the petitioner filed the present Contempt Petition alleging that respondents no.1 to 5 have acted in defiant and derogatory manner and committed breach of the order dated 27th July, 2009. 5. Perusal of the documents produced by the petitioner himself shows that respondents no.1 and 3 have complied with the order dated 27th July, 2009 in its spirit as well as letter and gone through the selection process once again. The petitioner did not appear for the tests conducted under the selection process taking a stand that because of the order dated 27th July, 2009, he was not required to undergo any selection process and was entitled to be promoted to the post directly. Perusal of order dated 27th July, 2009 does not even remotedly suggest that the petitioner was so entitled. 6. In the circumstances, this contempt petition, which is wholly misconceived and frivolous petition, filed despite having knowledge that respondents no.1 and 3 have complied with the directions contained in the order, is liable to be dismissed and is dismissed. Notice of 6 contempt is discharged. 7. Petitioner is directed to pay costs of the petition in the sum of Rs.1000/- to each of the respondent. The costs to be paid within a period of four weeks from today. JUDGE. Diwale