1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Contempt Petition No.192 of 2009 In Writ Petition Nos.2111, 2112, 2113 of 1997 and 3038 of 2009 (Pending) (Gulam Badar s/o Noman Badruddin and others v. S.S. Ali Quadri, Chief Executive Officer, Maharashtra State Board of Wakfs, Aurangabad and another) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's order Shri Z.A. Haq, Advocate for Petitioners. Coram : K.U. Chandiwal, J. Dated : 21st June, 2010 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. The counsel for the alleged contemner is absent in spite of service. 3. The writ Court in Writ Petition Nos.1633 and 2669 of 2008, by order dated 17-2-2009, directed that the Wakf Board shall decide the proceedings in Application No.66 of 2005 as early as possible and in any case within six months from the date of the said order and it was also recorded that till then the parties shall 2 maintain status quo in relation to the entries in the record. 4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in spite of the specific direction that the proceedings in Application No.66 of 2005 were to be considered by the Wakf Board, it was the Chief Executive Officer of the Board, who threatened by his communication insisting to file the responses and thereafter canvassed that he will keep the papers before the Board. Such exercise by the Chief Executive Officer amounts to disobedience of the order passed by this Court. 5. An affidavit is tendered by the alleged contemner on 15-12-2009, which is on page 219 of the petition. There is no controversy about his status as the Chief Executive Officer of respondent No.2 Board. In para 2 of the affidavit, he has tendered unconditional apology in the event this Court holds him guilty of committing contempt. He states that he believes in rule of law and he has never even in his wildest dreams thought of committing any contempt of this Court, much less by disobeying any order passed by this Court. He tried to justify his action, by stating in para 4 of the affidavit, that while discharging his duties as Chief Executive Officer of the Wakf Board, he issued a notice dated 31-8-2009 to the parties to Application No.66 of 2005 calling upon them to file 3 their written submissions so that the matter can be placed before the respondent-Board and the orders can be obtained. He has annexed the said notice to the petition. According to him, he simply called upon the parties to file their written submissions in order to place the same before the respondent-Board for its decision. He further states that by no stretch of imagination, it can be said that the proceedings are closed for orders by him. 6. Considering the above aspects of the matter, the contempt proceedings to the extent of the disobedience of the order dated 17-2-2009, as reflected in Writ Petitions Nos.1633 and 2669 of 2008 are dropped. The remedy of the petitioner to move for other grievance, which is part of the contempt petition, is kept open. (K.U. Chandiwal), Judge. pdl.