Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2188 (BOM)

KAILASH KISHORE GUPTA v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

CONPW/96/2026 · 2026-08-19

Contempt Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

7. CONPWL 2446-2026.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (L) NO.96 OF 2026 IN WRIT PETITION NO.3947 OF 2025 Kailash Kishore Gupta …. Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra And Ors. … Respondents ….. Mr. Shakil Ahmed a/w Mr. Neelraj Shetty and Mr. Rohit Dhotre for the Petitioner. Mr. Suraj Gupte, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1-State. Ms. Jyoti Mhatre a/w Mr. Bibhishan Sutar i/b Ms. Komal Punjabi for Respondent-MCGM. Mr. Avinash Pawar, Officer (I/c) F/N Ward from MCGM, present. Smt. P.H. Kantharia for Respondent-S.R.A. ….. CORAM: M.S. KARNIK & SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ. DATED : 19th AUGUST 2026 P.C. 1. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Order dated 25th September 2025, passed in Writ Petition (L) 29807 OF 2025, is breached by the Respondent-MCGM. The learned Counsel for the Respondent-MCGM submitted that there was no intention of defying the Order passed by this Court, but due to some genuine difficulty and also as the Petitioner was not present for hearing, the RaJesh Chittewan, PS 1/2 7. CONPWL 2446-2026.doc Order could not be complied with. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner denied this fact and submitted that the Petitioner remained present for hearing, but no hearing took place. 2. Be that as it may, the Petitioner shall remain present before the concerned Officer on 24th August 2026 at 11.00 a.m. The concerned Officer in terms of the Order dated 25th September 2025, shall hear the Petitioner. Time for complying with the Order dated 25th September 2025, is accordingly extended by further period of four weeks from 24th August 2026. If the Order is not complied with despite granting this indulgence, we shall be constrained to take serious view of the matter, including calling upon the concerned authority to remain personally present in this Court. 3. With the aforesaid directions, the Contempt Petition is disposed of. 4. Liberty to apply, in case of difficulty. (SANDESH D. PATIL, J.) (M.S. KARNIK, J.) RaJesh Chittewan, PS 2/2 RAJESH VASANT CHITTEWAN Digitally signed by RAJESH VASANT CHITTEWAN Date: 2026.08.20 17:49:59 +0530