IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.417 OF 2000 IN WRIT PETITION NO.3069 OF 2000 Shri Jaibhavani Shikshan Prasarak Mandal ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents ...... Mr.Vijay D.Patil for Petitioner. Mr.C.R.Sonawane, A.G.P. for Respondents. ...... CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. APRIL APRIL APRIL 17, 2006. 17, 2006. 17, 2006. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the parties. 2. Indeed, the Respondents have failed to comply with the direction given by the Division Bench of this Court in its order dated 4th July 2000 within four weeks as directed. However, it is common ground that the Petitioner’s representation : 2 : has now been decided, although after institution of the present Contempt Petition. As the direction stands complied with, it is not necessary to precipitate the matter further. 3. However, grievance of the Petitioner is that the decision is completely ill advised. That grievance cannot be considered in the present proceedings which is contempt action. It will be open to the Petitioner to take recourse to such other remedy as may be permissible by law wherein such grievance can be considered. If such Petition is filed, the same be considered on its own merits. This Petition is disposed of. 4. Notice issued to Respondents stands discharged. A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.