Bombay High Court

SHIRDI NAGAR PANCHAYAT THROUGH CHIEF OFFICER SHIRDIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: SANDIPKUMAR C MORE VAISHALI PATIL JADHAV

Holding

An interim contempt order ceases to exist upon the disposal of the main writ petition, and therefore the contempt petition must be dismissed.

Summary

Shirdi Nagar Panchayat filed a contempt petition alleging that land owners had violated an interim order dated 25 April 2018, which restrained any physical development on disputed open and amenity plots. The interim order was issued in the original Writ Petition No. 3805 of 2018, which, along with Writ Petition No. 2486 of 2018, was finally disposed of by the High Court on 4 July 2019 and the matter was taken up to the Apex Court. The respondents argued that, since the main writ petitions were disposed, the interim contempt order merged into the final order and could no longer be enforced. The petitioner contended that the land owners continued to act on the plots, constituting a breach of the interim order and justifying continuation of the contempt proceeding. The Court held that an interim contempt order does not survive the disposal of the substantive writ petition and declined to entertain the contempt petition, noting that the underlying land dispute remains a separate matter. Consequently, the contempt petition was dismissed without affecting the pending writ proceedings.

Issues considered

Whether an interim contempt order remains enforceable after the disposal of the main writ petition from which it arose
Whether the contempt petition can be entertained when the underlying land dispute is still pending

Subjects

contempt
interim order
writ petition
disposal
municipal council
land dispute
jurisdiction

Judgment

                                 (1)
                                                   CP-629.2018.odt
     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

         CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 629 OF 2018
          IN WRIT PETITION NO. 3805 OF 2018

Shirdi Nagar Panchayat                             Petitioner

     Versus

The State of Maharashtra
and others                                         Respondents

                             …
 Mr. V.D. Hon, Senior Advocate, i/by Mr. A.V. Hon a/w Mr.
      Harshvardhan Karad, Advocates for the petitioner.
      Mrs. U.S. Bhosale, A.G.P. for respondents - State.
Mr. Ajinkya Kale, Advocate holding for Talekar and Associates
                 for respondent Nos.2 and 3.
                             ...

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

                Closed for order on :         05.08.2026
                Pronounced on       :         06.08.2026

Order (Per Sandipkumar C. More, J. ) :

1.   Heard.



2.   Learned   counsel     for   the   respondents-land   owners

submits that the present contempt petition is based on the

order dated 25 April 2018, wherein the present petitioner and

respondents-landowners had undertaken not to carry out any

physical development on the disputed open and amenity plots.

He further added that the aforesaid order was only an interim

order in original Writ Petition No.3805 of 2018 alongwith
                              (2)
                                                 CP-629.2018.odt
connected Writ Petition No.2486 of 2018.          He further

submitted that vide order dated 04.07.2019 the aforesaid main

Writ Petitions are finally disputed by this Court and even the

said order was carried out upto the Hon'ble Apex Court and

certain offer was given to the land owners for making

representation to the Municipal Council, Shirdi to seek for

alternate land.    Learned counsel for the respondents-land

owners thus submitted that when the main Writ Petition

No.3805 of 2018 is already disposed of, then the order under

contempt, which is only an interim measure, stood merged in

the final order.



3.    On the contrary, learned senior counsel Mr. V.D. Hon for

contempt petitioner submits that even though there was

certain compromise talks between the land owners and

Municipal Council, Shirdi after the judgment of Hon'ble Apex

Court, but a separate petition is going on between them about

the dispute regarding grant of alternate land. Learned senior

counsel further submitted that despite the order under

contempt, though as interim, the land owners have committed

breach of that order by carrying out the activities on the

disputed one plots.   Thus, he opposed for disposing of the

present contempt petition.
                                 (3)
                                                       CP-629.2018.odt
4.      It is significant to note that the order under contempt in

this petition is in fact an interim order and on disposal of

original Writ Petition No.3805 of 2018, now interim order does

not survive. Even otherwise also, the dispute regarding open

plots    between   the   Municipal      Council,   Shirdi   and   the

respondents-land owners is going on separately and when the

order under contempt is not in existence on disposal of main

petition, we are not inclined to entertain the present contempt

petition by going into disputed facts between the parties.

Accordingly, the contempt petition stands disposed of.            We

make it clear that disposal of this contempt petition will not be

having any impact on the ongoing writ petition between the

parties.




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




VD_Dhirde

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…