Bombay High Court
Baby Jalindar Awate alias Kiran Shrikrushana DahihandeversusOm Prakash Gupata And Ors.
Holding
The court accepted the respondents' undertaking to decide the matters within two weeks and disposed of the contempt petition without finding contempt.
Summary
The petitioner, Baby Jalindar Awate, filed a contempt petition alleging that Respondents No.3 and No.4 failed to comply with a court order dated 9 December 2025, which required them to decide the representation and proposal for pay fixation within six weeks. The court noted that, despite the lapse of the prescribed period, the respondents submitted that the representations would be decided within two weeks. The court treated this submission as a formal undertaking to the court. Accepting the undertaking, the bench held that there was no aggravated contempt. Consequently, the contempt petition was disposed of without any finding of contempt. The decision underscores the court’s willingness to accept reasonable undertakings to cure procedural defaults in contempt matters.
Issues considered
- Whether the failure to decide the representation and pay‑fixation proposal within the six‑week period amounts to contempt of court.
- Whether an undertaking to comply within a further two‑week period suffices to stay or dismiss the contempt proceedings.
Subjects
- contempt of court
- non‑compliance with court order
- undertaking
- civil appellate jurisdiction
- pay fixation
- representation
Judgment
2026:BHC-KOL:9789-DB
30-CP-216-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 216 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 16429 OF 2024
Baby Jalindar Awate @ Kiran Shrikrushana Dahihande ...Petitioner
Versus
Om Prakash Gupata And Others ...Respondents
——————
Mr. Ratan Adhe a/w Adv. A.R.Barad, for the Petitioner.
Mr. R.P.Kadam, “B” Panel counsel a/w Mr. V.G.Badgujar, AGP for the
Respondent-State.
——————
CORAM : SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH &
NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ.
DATE : OCTOBER 08, 2026.
P. C. :
1. By the present Petition, contempt is alleged of the order dated 9 th
December, 2025 by which Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 were issued
directions to decide the representation and the proposal for pay
fixation within a period of six weeks. Though, the order was passed on
9th December, 2025, till date representations have not been decided.
2. Learned counsel for the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 would submit
that within a period of two weeks representation will be decided.
3. The said statement is accepted as undertaking given to this Court.
It is expected that within a period of two weeks, the order dated 9 th
Arya Chavan 1 of 2
30-CP-216-2026.doc
December, 2025 would be complied and there would be no aggravated
contempt.
4. The Contempt Petition is disposed of in light of the said
statement.
[NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.] [SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.]
Arya Chavan 2 of 2
Checking your session…