cp225.09 & cp226.09.odt 1 . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Contempt Petition No. 225 of 2009 In W. P. No. 5229 of 2004 & W.P. 3500 of 2008 (D) ( Sau. Manjusha w/o Arvind Sakharkar and others ..vs.. Ramdas D. Patil and another ) With Contempt Petition No. 226 of 2009 In W. P. No. 5229 of 2004, W.P. No. 2609 of 2008 & W.P. No. 3502 of 2008 (D) ( Shri Ramesh s/o Nanaji Chalak and others ..vs.. Dr. Vipin Sharma, C.E.O., Z.P. Chandrapur and another ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders Mr. A.R. Patil, Advocate for the petitioners, Mr. Mohan Sudame, Advocate for the respondent No.2 in C.P. No. 225 of 2009, Mr. N.W. Almelkar, Advocate for the respondent No.1 in C.P. No. 226 of 2009. Coram: R. K. Deshpande, J. Date : March 17, 2010 1. Both these petitions complain violation of the common judgment and order dated 21st October, 2005 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 4772 of 2004, Writ Petition No. 5129 of 2004 and Writ cp225.09 & cp226.09.odt 2 . Petition No. 5229 of 2004. All these Writ Petitions raised a grievance in respect of grant of higher pay scale upon possessing graduate and training qualification. The complaint was that the grant of higher pay scale to the Teachers in Primary Schools as per the Government Resolution has to be in accordance with seniority to be counted from the date of acquisition of training qualification. 2. These writ petitions were allowed and the respondent/Zilla Parishad was directed to prepare a seniority list of Teachers on the basis of acquiring of training qualification for the purposes of grant of benefit of the Government Resolution regarding higher pay scale. It is not disputed that such seniority list has been prepared and the benefits are granted to the employees in accordance with the seniority. 3. Writ Petition No. 3500 of 2008 was filed by the petitioners complaining about super-session in the matter of promotion to the post of Kendra Pramukh, which is a post step above the post of Assistant Teacher. The cp225.09 & cp226.09.odt 3 . grievance of the petitioners was that the seniority list prepared for the purposes of granting benefit under the Government Resolution was required to be operated and instead of that Zilla Parishad prepared the separate seniority list on the basis of entry in the service taking the date of acquisition of training qualification as a basis for counting seniority for the purposes of promotion to the Kendra Pramukh. In the said Writ Petition a statement was made on behalf of the Zilla Parishad that the process of preparing seniority list in accordance with the judgment delivered by this Court on 21st October, 2005, was under way and while preparing such seniority list the claims of the petitioners shall be considered. This Court had held that in the backdrop of the facts and the statement made by the Counsel for Zilla Parishad, it is evident that the Zilla Parishad is going to consider the claim of the petitioners after preparation of the seniority list in accordance with law and the impugned order/communication dated 19-7-2008 shall not come in the way of Zilla Parishad to claim of the petitioner and those who are similar circumstances in accordance with law. This Court further recorded the statement of the Advocate for Zilla Parishad that till the cp225.09 & cp226.09.odt 4 . entire process of preparation of seniority list is completed, promotions will not be effected to the post of Kendra Pramukh. 4. The learned Advocate appearing for the Zilla Parishad has pointed out that the seniority list, in accordance with law, has been prepared for the purposes of promotion to the higher post of Kendra Pramukh and the same shall be operated for the purposes of promotion to the posts of Kendra Pramukh and Extension Officer. According to the learned Advocate for the respondent, the seniority list has been prepared as per the Recruitment Rules, by taking date of entry in service,as the basis for counting seniority. While preparing such seniority list the claims of the petitioners and those who are included in the seniority list for the purposes of grant of benefit under Government Resolution have also been considered. 5. Shri Arun Patil, the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners, has complained in the instant contempt petitions that in view of the Judgment delivered by this Court on earlier occasion in Writ Petition No. 4772 of 2004 cp225.09 & cp226.09.odt 5 . and other connected matters on 21st October, 2005, the respondent-Zilla Parishad could not have prepared the seniority list on the basis of entry in service, but it should have operated the seniority list, which was prepared pursuant to the said Judgment for the purposes of promotion to the higher posts. As against this, Shri Sudame, the learned Advocate for the respondent-Zilla Parishad has urged that there is no direction issued by this Court in the aforesaid two Judgments that for the purposes of promotion to the post of Kendra Pramukh or the Extension Officer, the seniority list prepared on the basis of acquisition of trained qualification has to be operated. In absence of any such specific direction, the seniority list prepared is in accordance with the Recruitment Rules and if the petitioners have any grievance in respect thereof, it will be open for them to adopt such other remedies as are open in law. 6. After considering the contentions raised by the learned Advocates for the parties, I am of the view that, there is no question of any contempt of any of the orders passed by this Court, muchless of willful nature. The cp225.09 & cp226.09.odt 6 . question whether the seniority list prepared for the purposes of granting benefit of Government Resolution should be operated for the purposes of promotion to the higher posts of Kendra Pramukh and Extension Officer has not been decided in any of the proceedings and it is a question for which the petitioners can adopt the appropriate remedies for getting it adjudicated. 7. In view of above, there is no substance in the contempt petitions, hence the same are dismissed. However, it is made clear that the dismissal of the contempt petitions shall not come in the way of petitioners in adopting remedies available to them in leave to challenge criteria adopted for preparation of seniority list. JUDGE adgokar