Bombay High Court

SANTOSH SHYAMRAO HUSSEKARversusTHE STATE OF MAH AND ORS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

Since the underlying writ petition was partly allowed and no issue remains, the contempt petition was disposed.

Summary

The petitioner, Santosh Shyamrao Hussekar, filed Contempt Petition No. 383 of 2011 against the State of Maharashtra. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the contempt petition should remain in abeyance until the resolution of Writ Petition No. 355 of 2012. The Court noted that the writ petition had been partly allowed by its judgment dated 19 August 2015. In view of the partial relief granted in the writ petition, the Court held that no issue remained for determination in the contempt proceeding. Consequently, the contempt petition was disposed of, with the Court granting the petitioner liberty to approach the Court again if the directions issued in the writ petition are not complied with.

Subjects

contempt
writ petition
abeyance
disposal
partial relief

Judgment

                                     (1)
                                                         905 CP-383.2011.odt
     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

         905 CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 383 OF 2011
                   IN WP/8276/2010

              SANTOSH SHYAMRAO HUSSEKAR
                        VERSUS
         THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Mr. Pratap Rodge, Advocate for the petitioner.
        Mr. Govind Kulkarni, A.G.P. for respondent-State.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

                    DATED       : 16th September, 2026

Order (Per Vaishali Patil-Jadhav, J.) :

1.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this

contempt petition was kept in abeyance till disposal of Writ

Petition No. 355 of 2012. Now the said Writ Petition is partly

allowed by judgment and order dated 19.08.2015.

2.    In view of above, nothing survives in this contempt

petition and the contempt petition is disposed of with liberty to

the petitioner that if the directions are not complied with, he

may challenge the same by availing appropriate remedy

available in law.



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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…