Bombay High Court

ANIL AMBADAS TANDALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The contempt order was deemed complied with, leading to the disposal of the petition.

Summary

The petitioner, Anil Ambadas Tandale, filed a contempt petition seeking a fresh advertisement for the post of Kotwal in Ghogargaon village. The court ordered the respondent authority to issue the advertisement. The respondent filed an affidavit showing that a process for appointment had already been initiated, supported by a communication dated 23/10/2020. The court held that, given the passage of time, the contempt order had been complied with. Consequently, the petition was disposed of, with the petitioner granted liberty to raise the issue again if the appointment process remains incomplete.

Issues considered

Whether the respondent complied with the contempt order to issue a fresh advertisement for the Kotwal post
Whether the petition should be dismissed on the basis of compliance

Subjects

contempt of court
public service appointment
advertisement
administrative compliance
judicial order

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:37436-DB

909 cp 332-20 .

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

909 CONT. PETITION NO. 332 OF 2020
IN WP/9184/2018

ANIL AMBADAS TANDALE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Mr. Yogesh Bolkar h/f Mr. Jadhav Kakasaheb B., Advocate for the
Petitioner
Mr. A. S. Shinde, AGP for Respondent-State
….

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

Date : 19/08/2026

PER COURT :

1. Heard.

2. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner sought time to take

instructions, but as per the order under contempt, the respondent-

authority was to issue a fresh advertisement inviting applications for

the post of Kotwal for village Ghogargaon Sajja. Learned AGP, by

pointing out the affidavit in reply, submits that respondent No.2 had

already initiated the process for appointment of Kotwal for village

Ghogargaon. The communication dated 23/10/2020 is also annexed

with the affidavit in reply to that effect. As such, by the passage of time,

VS Maind/ Page|1
909 cp 332-20 .

the order under contempt appears to have been complied with. In view

of the same, the petition stands disposed of, with liberty to the

petitioner to agitate the issue if the process of appointment of Kotwal

has not been completed.

[VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV] [SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE]
JUDGE JUDGE

VS Maind/ Page|2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…