Bombay High Court

VIVEK SANJAY THAKURversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The contempt petition is dismissed as there is nothing left to adjudicate.

Summary

The petitioner filed a contempt petition arising from an order dated 25 September 2020 that required him to appear for taking circulation and to provide copies for issuance of notice to respondents. The petitioner failed to appear for the circulation and did not supply the required copies. The direction in the underlying writ petition was to decide the petitioner’s caste claim, which, according to the court, had become moot with the passage of time. The court observed that, because of the petitioner’s non‑compliance, there was nothing left to adjudicate in the contempt petition. Consequently, the court disposed of the petition without any further order.

Issues considered

Whether the contempt petition should be entertained despite the petitioner’s failure to appear for taking circulation and to furnish the required documents?

Subjects

contempt petition
non‑compliance
procedural default
caste claim
petition dismissed

Judgment

                                     (1)
                                                         909 CP-272.2020.odt
     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

         909 CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 272 OF 2020
                   IN WP/5206/2020

                  VIVEK SANJAY THAKUR
                         VERSUS
         THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         None for the petitioner.
          Mr. G.A. Kulkarni, A.G.P. for respondent-State.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

                    DATED       : 1st October, 2026

Per Court :

1.    None for the petitioner.

2.    It appears that after order dated 25th September 2020,

the petitioner did not turn up for taking circulation. He also

did not supply copies for issuance of notice to the concerned

respondents.      Even otherwise also, the direction in the writ

petition is to decide the caste claim of the petitioner, which, by

the passage of time must have been decided.

3.    As such, nothing survives in this petition and it stands

disposed of.



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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…