cp85.06 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 85 OF 2006 Ramchandra s/o Kisanrao Bamne ...Petitioner Versus Shri B.G. Wagh and others ...Respondents ..... None for the petitioner Mr. H.K. Mundhe, advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2 ..... CORAM: R.M. BORDE, J. DATED: 28TH MARCH, 2011 PER COURT:- 1 None appears for the petitioner. Shri Mundhe, learned counsel appears for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. 2 The petitioner is alleging breach of interim order passed on 14.3.2006, by the Division Bench of this Court in writ petition No. 1959 of 2006. The writ petition was presented by the petitioner seeking issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to hold and declare the petitioner as regular Chief of Center (dsanzizeq[k). The petitioner was also seeking writ of certiorari for quashing of order of his transfer dated 23.2.2006. The petitioner was transferred by virtue of said order from Maniyarwadi, Tq. Georai, District Beed to village cp85.06 -2- Umapur, in Georai Taluka. 3 While entertaining the petition, this court by order dated 14.3.2006, granted stay to the execution and implementation of transfer order dated 23.2.2006. It is the contention of the petitioner that Inspite of grant of stay by this court, the Education Officer issued Circular on 16.3.2006 and directed the petitioner to resume duties at village Umapur. The petitioner was relieved of his charge as Chief of Center of village Maniyarwadi, Tq. Georai. According to the petitioner, the act of issuance of circular by Education Officer on 16.3.2006 is in breach of the interim orders passed by this court on 14.3.2006. Respondent No.1 Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Beed has presented affidavit in reply. It is stated by the said respondent that he came to know about passing of interim order by the High court only on receiving letters from the petitioner on 21.3.2006 and 29.3.2006. It is further stated that the Chief Executive Officer immediately issued direction and ensured compliance of order passed by this court. It is stated that necessary orders were issued on 24.4.2006 and the status quo anterior to the passing of impugned order is maintained. 4 The Education Officer has also filed an affidavit in reply wherein he has stated that he was not aware of the orders passed by this court on 14.3.2006 while he issued circular on 16.3.2006. Education Officer cp85.06 -3- became aware of the orders passed by this court only on receipt of letters from the petitioner on 21.3.2006 and on 29.3.2006. Both the respondents stated that they have not intentionally violated the directions issued by this court. 5 Apart from this fact, it is informed by Shri Mundhe counsel appearing for respondents that writ petition, challenging the order of transfer dated 23.3.2006, was dismissed by this court on 22.2.2008 and the transfer order passed by the Zilla Parishad which was subjected to challenge in writ petition is confirmed. 6 In view of these facts, as enumerated above, I am of the opinion that there is no intentional breach of the orders passed by this court at the hands of respondents. The contempt petition is devoid of substance and same stands dismissed. Rule discharged. No costs. ( R.M. BORDE. J.) rlj/