Bombay High Court

GAJANAN ONKAR GAIKWADversusUDAY CHAUDHARI THE COLLECTOR AURANGABAD AND ANOTHER

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: SANDIPKUMAR C MORE VAISHALI PATIL JADHAV

Holding

The court held that the petitioners had complied with the contempt orders and therefore disposed of the contempt petitions.

Summary

Multiple petitioners filed contempt petitions (Nos. 90, 96, 98, 99, 101, 102, 103, 104 of 2020) against Uday Chaudhari and another, alleging non‑compliance with earlier court orders. The petitioners, through counsel Sanket S. Joshi, submitted that the contempt orders had been fully complied with. The respondents, represented by State AGP counsel, did not contest the compliance. The bench consisting of Justice Sandipkumar C. More and Justice Vaishali Patil‑Jadhav examined the submissions and found the compliance satisfactory. Consequently, the court held there was no ground to continue the contempt proceedings and ordered the petitions to be disposed. The contempt petitions were therefore dismissed as the orders were deemed complied with.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioners have complied with the orders passed in the earlier contempt proceedings?

Subjects

contempt of court
compliance
disposal of petition
high court
multiple petitions

Judgment

                                             903 to 910



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
           BENCH AT AURANGABAD
         903 CONT. PETITION NO. 90 OF 2020
                  IN WP/508/2019
                  Laxman Bhika Jawale
                        Versus
               Uday Chaudhari And Another
                       AND
         904 CONT. PETITION NO. 96 OF 2020
                  IN WP/513/2019
                Dagadu Sakharam Jamkar
                        Versus
               Uday Chaudhari And Another
                       AND
         905 CONT. PETITION NO. 98 OF 2020
                  IN WP/846/2019
                 Uttam Laxman Girnare
                        Versus
               Uday Chaudhari And Another
                       AND
         906 CONT. PETITION NO. 99 OF 2020
                  IN WP/474/2019
                  Jayaji Kaluba Gadekar
                          Versus
               Uday Chaudhari And Another
                       AND
        907 CONT. PETITION NO. 101 OF 2020
                  IN WP/852/2019
                 Sheshrao Ramrao Mirge
                        Versus
               Uday Chaudhari And Another
                       AND
        908 CONT. PETITION NO. 102 OF 2020
                  IN WP/863/2019
                 Gajanan Onkar Gaikwad
                         Versus
               Uday Chaudhari And Another
                          AND
Komal Kamble                                 Page|1
                                                       903 to 910



             909 CONT. PETITION NO. 103 OF 2020
                       IN WP/509/2019
                      Gyanaba Namdeo Idhate
                             Versus
                    Uday Chaudhari And Another
                            AND
             910 CONT. PETITION NO. 104 OF 2020
                       IN WP/855/2019
          Dnyaneshwar Vishwambhar Ghadmode
                           Versus
               Uday Chaudhari And Another
__________________________________________________________
  • Adv. Sanket S. Joshi h/f. Adv. Ashok A. More for the
     Petitioners in all Contempt Petitions

     Ms. D. S. Jape, Mr. N. B. Patil, Mr. G. A. Kulkarni, Mr.
      •
     V. V. Jahagirdar, Mr. S. J. Salgar, Ms. D. S. Jape, Mr.
     N. B. Patil and Mr. G. A. Kulkarni, AGP for State in all
     Contempt Petitions respectively
__________________________________________________________

                    CORAM    : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE &
                               VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ.

                    DATE     : 06.08.2026
PER COURT :

1]          Learned Advocate Mr. Sanket S. Joshi holding for

Mr. A. A. More, learned counsel for the petitioners, on

instructions, submits that the orders under contempt in all

present petitions are complied with.

2]          Contempt Petitions, therefore, stand disposed of.



(VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV)            (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE)
          JUDGE                            JUDGE


     Komal Kamble                                      Page|2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…