1 cp90.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 90 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 589 OF 2010 Ramrao s/o Kisan Pawar, Age: 68 years, Occ: Nothing, R/o. Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar, Chite Pimpalgaon, Tq. Aurangabad, District Aurangbad. ...PETITIONER VERSUS Sandipan s/o Asaram Patil Bhumare, Age: 50 years, Occ: Chairman, R/o. Care of Shri Sant Eknath Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., Eknathnagar, Paithan, Tq.Paithan, District Aurangabad & Ors. ...RESPONDENTS ... Mr. Ramesh R. Imale, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. D.R. Kale, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1& 2. Mr. N.B. Suryawanshi,Advocate for respondent No.3. ... CORAM: S.S. SHINDE, J. DATE : 16TH SEPTEMBER, 2011 PER COURT : . This contempt petition alleges disobedience of the order passed by this Court on 27-07-2010 in Writ Petition NO. 589 of 2010 and other connected writ petitions. 2 cp90.11 2. In pursuant to the notice issued in this contempt petition, the respondents have filed their affidavit in reply. This Court in order of which disobedience has been alleged in this contempt petition, in Para-5 directed respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in the said writ petition to pay the amount which are found due and payable to the petitioners, after deducting the amount which are already paid to the petitioners prior to their superannuation or thereafter. 3. It is the contention of learned Counsel appearing for original respondent Nos. 2 and 3 i.e. respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein, that as per the direction in Para-5 of the order, of which disobedience has been alleged in this contempt petition, chart is prepared showing the total amount paid to the petitioners and due amount payable to them. According to respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein, balance amount of Rs.14,908/- is remained to be paid to the petitioner in Writ 3 cp90.11 Petition No. 589 of 2010. It is further submitted by learned Counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein that, the cheque dated 10-09-2011 for Rs.14,907/- (Rs. Fourteen thousand nine hundred and seven only) drawn on State Bank of India, Branch Paithan District Aurangabad is ready with him. . Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, calculation which is shown in Exhibit-R-3 i.e. chart prepared by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein, is not correct and he is disputing correctness of the figures mentioned in the said chart. Therefore, he submits that, chart Exhibit-R-3 (at Pages 73-74) placed alongwith affidavit in reply by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein, may not be taken as correct position. 4. I have given due consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned Counsels appearing for the respective parties, also perused 4 cp90.11 the order of which disobedience has been alleged in this contempt petition, upon perusal of Para-5 of the said order, it clearly appears that, respondent Nos. 2 and 3 i.e. respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein, were given opportunity to verify the due amount from the office record available with the sugar factory and then pay the due amount to the petitioner. Accordingly, respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein, have prepared the cheque of Rs.14,907/- and handed over the same to the Counsel for the petitioner before this Court. . Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, this Court on 13-07-2011 observed in the order that, Counsel for respondent No.3 herein, to take instructions as to within how much time respondent No.3 will deposit the balance amount of Rs.40,163/- in the Registry of this Court. In respect of said order, it is clarified that on the relevant date, Court was considering submissions of the Counsel for the petitioner and it was argued by the Counsel for the petitioner 5 cp90.11 that, petitioner is entitled to the amount of Rs. 40,163/- and accordingly same is recorded in the order and said observations in the order cannot be taken as an adjudication on the entitlement of the petitioner. 5. It is not possible for this court to resolve the controversy raised by the petitioner about his entitlement of the remaining amount in contempt proceedings. It is for the petitioner to take appropriate remedy as available under law in that respect. Nothing further survives for consideration in this Contempt petition and same stands disposed of. Notice stands discharged. [S.S. SHINDE, J.] sut/SEP11