Bombay High Court
SYED AZIZ MOHIUDDIN MUSTAFA ALIversusCRESCENT EDUCATION SOC. AND ORS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The contempt petition is disposed of as nothing survives due to the lapse of time.
Summary
The petitioner, Syed Aziz Mohiuddin Mustafa Ali, filed a contempt petition (Contempt Petition No. 140 of 2013) seeking a direction to decide his representation within a specified period. The court noted that the direction was originally issued in 2012 and, given the passage of time without any action by the petitioner, it was presumed to have been decided. The petitioner did not appear before the court, and no further steps were taken after 2013. The judges held that, because the petition had lain dormant for many years, there was nothing left to adjudicate. Consequently, the contempt petition was disposed of with no further orders.
Issues considered
- What is the effect of a prolonged lapse of time on the viability of a contempt petition?
- Whether the direction issued in 2012 can be deemed decided by operation of time.
Subjects
- contempt
- petition dismissed
- lapse of time
- procedural default
- court disposal
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:39019
906 CONT. PETITION NO. 140 OF 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
906 CONT. PETITION NO. 140 OF 2013
IN WP/1521/2012
Syed Aziz Mohiuddin Mustafa Ali
Versus
Crescent Education Society And Others
__________________________________________________________
Adv. Mohammad Waseemullah for the Petitioner - Absent
Mr. Rajdeep D. Raut, AGP for State
Adv. S. W. Munde for Respondent No. 1 - Absent
Adv. Y. M. Khan for Respondent No. 2 - Absent
__________________________________________________________
CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE AND
VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ.
DATE : AUGUST 28, 2026
PER COURT :
1) None appears for the petitioner.
2) The direction issued in the order under
contempt was to decide the representation of the petitioner
within a specified period. However, given that the said
direction was passed in the year 2012, it is presumed to
have been decided by the passage of time. Furthermore, the
petitioner has not circulated this matter after 2013 until
today.
3) In view of the above, nothing survive in the
present petition. Contempt Petition, therefore, stands
disposed of.
(VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV) (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE)
JUDGE JUDGE
Komal Kamble Page 1 of 1
Checking your session…