1 1. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO.331/2007 in CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 68/2005 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 5188/1996 (Ramesh Deshmukh Vs. Shri Kanhre RB and Ors.) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.Sachin Deshmukh, Advocate for petitioner; Mr. DV Tele, AGP for Respondent no.1; Mr.VD Hon, Advocate for Respondent No.2; Mr.AB Girase, Advocate for Respondent no.3 ___ CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 28 th January, 2010. ... 1) Heard respective counsel. 2) The petitioner feels that the order of Division Bench of this Court dated 2.12.2005 and the subsequent order in the Contempt Petition No.68/2000 are not complied with in its letter and spirit and hence contempt. 3) Shorn of the details of interse litigation, it can be seen that the petitioner herein, pursuant to the orders of this Court, has received arrears of salary from 1992-1993 till June 2007 to the tune of around Rs. 21,00,000/-. 2 4) The petitioner submits, that his entitlement to senior scale of Selection Grade is not considered. 5) Basically, fixation of Senior scale, if attached with the regular duties, such application is in tune to be claimed. However, if it is not attached with such duties, the senior scale could not have been fixed as a matter of course. 6) The affidavit of Rangnath s/o Bhimrao Kanhere, Joint Director, Higher Education, illustrate that the salary arrears to the tune of Rs.29,94,547/- are released in favour of the petitioner. It is informed that the directions of the Division Bench are fully complied with. 7) In the affidavit of Dr. Ajit Uttamrao Wagh, then Principal of SS Patil College, Jalgaon, indicates that the financial benefits, to which the petitioner was eligible and entitled, are released in favour of the petitioner and the directions are complied with. 8) The repeated harping by Mr.Deshmukh about the terminology “with consequential benefits” need not be stretched to mean that as of right, the petitioner shall be entitled to the senior scale or selection grade as a promotional avenues. It is a policy decision to be taken by the University, 3 the statutory authority, as per the pay fixation made by the college authorities of the petitioner. The record illustrate, the college of the petitioner has considered all the aspects and granted the arrears in tune with entitlement of the petitioner. There is obviously no breach/contempt of the orders of this Court or I do not see any deliberate omission on the part of respondents to avoid financial benefits receivable to the petitioner. No dereliction on the part of the respondent. Contempt Petition lacks merit, it is dismissed. 9) Needless to add, if on accounts the petitioner has still any grievance, he can independently resort to by approaching the College authorities and the Government explaining his eligibility. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/cp331.07 fldr 25.1.10