1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Contempt Petition No. 241/2003 IN Writ Petition No. 2945/2001 (Smt. Pushpa wd/o Chhabilal Ramteke VERSUS The State of Maharashtra through the Secretary & others) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- Mr. A.D. Mohgaonkar, counsel for the petitioner. Mrs. I.L. Bodade, Assistant Government Pleader for the R-1 to 3. Mr. M.P. Lala, counsel for the R-4 & 5. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : APRIL 16, 2008. Heard. By this petition, the petitioner seeks appropriate action against respondent nos.2 to 5 for disobeying the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.2945/2001 on 19.08.2002. It is the case of the petitioner that the Division Bench of this Court had, while issuing Rule in the aforesaid writ petition on 19.08.2002, directed the respondents to take a decision on the pension case of the petitioner within a period of two months. It is the case of the petitioner that the complete pension case papers were submitted to the respondent no.5 by the petitioner on 02.09.2002. After submission of the pension papers, the petitioner also intimated this fact to the other respondents. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that though the order was passed by the Division Bench on 19.08.2002, no action has been taken by the 2 respondent and the petitioner is illegally deprived of her pensionary benefits. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the action on behalf of the respondent is deliberate and the respondent do not have any regards for the orders passed by the Hon'ble High Court. Shri Mohgaonkar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is being paid provisional pension during the pendency of the Writ Petition No.2945/2001 and during the pendency of this contempt petition. The reason stated by the respondents in their respective affidavits for the delay in deciding the pension case is due to technical reasons as also because of the fact that there is a dispute about some entries in the service book of the petitioner. Even otherwise, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is pending before the Division Bench of this Court and the question of payment of arrears of salary is pending before this Court. In this view of the matter, the contempt proceedings need to be dropped. Hence, the contempt proceedings are hereby dropped and the contempt petition is disposed of with no order as to costs. Rule is discharged. JUDGE APTE