Bombay High Court

SC ST VJNT OBC SBC GOVT SEMI GOVT EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATION THROUGH REGIONAL CHIEF EXECUTIVE R N PAWARversusANUPKUMAR YADAV THE SECRETARY, AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The Court held that no contempt occurred as the contempt order did not mandate payment as per the 18‑08‑2018 proposal.

Summary

The SC/ST/OBC/SBC Government Employee Association filed a petition alleging contempt of court after the Tribal Development Department's proposal to grant a specific pay‑scale to male and female Hostel Superintendents dated 18‑08‑2018 was later reduced. The petitioners argued that the reduction amounted to contempt of the earlier order. The Court examined the contempt order dated 10‑October‑2019 and found that it did not expressly direct that the payment be made according to the 18‑08‑2018 proposal. Consequently, the Court held that no contempt had occurred. The petitioners were directed to pursue any appropriate legal remedy to challenge the subsequent reduction in pay‑scale. The petition was disposed of.

Issues considered

Whether the reduction of the pay‑scale for Hostel Superintendents after the 18‑08‑2018 proposal constitutes contempt of court.

Subjects

contempt of court
pay scale reduction
government employees
tribal development department
judicial review
civil procedure

Judgment

                                  (1)
                                                   908- C.P. 395-2020.odt
          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                 CONT. PETITION NO. 395 OF 2020
                        IN WP/6363/2018

 SC ST VJNT OBC SBC GOVT SEMI GOVT EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATION
       THROUGH REGIONAL CHIEF EXECUTIVE R N PAWAR
                                VERSUS
        ANUPKUMAR YADAV THE SECRETARY, AND OTHERS
                                   …..
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Vijay A. Dhakne
AGP for Respondents: Mr. G. A. Kulkarni
                                    ...

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

                  DATED :       August 21, 2026

ORDER:-

1.    Heard.



2.    Though the direction in this matter is only for taking decision in

respect of proposal dated 18.08.2018 floated by Tribal Development

Department to the Finance Department with recommendation to grant

certain pay-scale to the male and female Hostel Superintendents.



3.    The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, though such

proposal was floated, but thereafter the scale proposed to be given to

the Hostel Superintendents, was in fact reduced, and therefore, the

contempt has taken place.



4.    However, in the order under contempt, dated 10th October
                                   (2)
                                                  908- C.P. 395-2020.odt
2019, there was no direction given that the payment to the Hostel

Superintendents was to be given as proposed in the proposal dated

18.08.2018. Under such circumstances, we do not find any contempt

in this petition.



5.     The petitioners may take out any appropriate proceedings as

permissible under law, for challenging the subsequent reduction in the

pay-scale of Hostel Superintendents.



6.     With these, we dispose of this petition.




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

YSK/

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…