1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION (N) NO.26 OF 2011. IN CONTEMPT PETITION NO.34 OF 2011. (DECIDED ON 11.04.2011) Minendrakumar s/o Narayan Shrirame Vs. Shri Anand Bharkade, Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Nagpur ........................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ........................................................................................................................................... Shri B.M. Kharkate, Advocate for Applicant/Petitioner. Mrs. S.W. Deshpande, Adv. for Non-Applicant/ Respondent. CORAM : R. K.DESHPANDE, J. DATE : 28th JULY, 2011. This application is for modification of the order dated 11.04.2011 passed by this Court in Contempt Petition No.34/2011. The learned counsel for the applicant Shri Kharkate, submits that contempt petition was disposed of on the basis of the order dated 08.04.2011, issued by the respondent which was placed on record and marked as ‘X’ for identification. According to him, the order dated 08.04.2011 place on record was not in 2 conformity with the judgment and order passed by this Court which was the subject matter of contempt petition. By the judgment and order dated 10.08.2010 passed in Writ Petition No. 4204/2001, this Court had directed respondent- Zilla Parishad to appoint the petitioner strictly in accordance with the directions issued by the government as per Annexure-I dated 31.10.2000/06.11.2000 by placing them in appropriate post and grade and further to give them all benefits from the said direction from the government. The respondent-Zilla Parishad was directed to pay cost of Rs.2000/- to each of the petitioners. In response to the notice issued by this Court Mrs. S.W. Deshpande, learned counsel appears for the Zilla Parishad and she has filed affidavit dated 27.07.2011 sworn by the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad. The complaint 3 of the petitioner is that the order of appointment dated 08.04.2011 incorporates the clause (2) that the appointment of the petitioner is on temporary basis and the same can be terminated without any notice or reason. In the affidavit filed by the respondent-Chief Executive Officer of the Zilla Parishad, it is specifically denied that the appointment is of a temporary in nature. It is however, urged that the order in which the condition is mentioned that the appointment is subject to compliance of Rules 4, 6 and 8 of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishad District Services (Recruitment) Rules, 1967 and hence the order of appointment according to the respondent is required to be construed accordingly. Mrs. Deshpande, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.1 makes a statement that in terms of the judgment and order dated 10.08.2010 passed by this Court all the benefits flowing from 4 the directions given by this Court shall be made available to the petitioner. She further makes a statement that cost of Rs.2000/- shall also be paid to each of the petitioners within period of eight weeks. In view of this specific stand on the affidavit, nothing survives in this application. Hence, the same is dismissed. JUDGE NSN