1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION (W) No. 1049/2010 in WRIT PETITION NO. 3034/1996 Madhukar Nagorao Mendhe and another versus The Education Officer and others. =-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders of directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-== Mr. P.A.Kadu h/f V.A.Kothale, counsel for applicant Mr. N.S.Khubalkar, AGP, for respondent No.1. C ORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATED : 10th JUNE, 2010. Heard. 2) By the present civil application, the petitioner urged for grant of extension of time for submission of salary bills to respondent no.1 Education Officer. 3) The order dated 17.10.2008 in Writ Petition No. 3034/1998 directed to carry the exercise within one month as per the undertaking given by the petitioner. However, it is informed that the writ was received on 20th November, 2008 in the Office of the Head Master and it was furnished on 27.11.2008 and then the bills 2 were submitted on 4.12.2008. The exercise apparently is not in tune with the directions of this Court dated 17.10.2008. It cannot be said that the petitioners were unaware of the compliance, as there was an undertaking to the Court, which naturally was in presence of the learned counsel representing the petitioners and he naturally knew the rigor and consequence of the order. This delay has certainly protracted the matter and the Education Officer was justified in not entertaining the belated submissions of the bills, as he could have faced the brunt of contempt. 4) The conduct of the petitioners needs only to be condemned. Such practice should be depricated, however, in order to meet the ends of justice, the time as sought is extended. The Education Officer is directed to accept the salary bills which were returned by him by communication dated 4.12.2008. 5) Application allowed to above extent. The petitioner to pay costs of Rs.1,000/- to the Education Officer. (K.U.Chandiwal) JUDGE. Rvjalit