1 CP-388-09.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Mhi CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 388 OF 2009 Shri Mangesh Bhaurao Khanwilkar ... Petitioner vs. The State of Maharashtra &Ors. ... Respondents None for the petitioner. Ms. Savina Boongera i/b. P.M.Talsania, Advocate, for the respondent NO.5. Mr. D.A.Sakhalkar, Advocate for the respondent Nos. 2 to 4. . CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE : 4th August, 2011. P.C. 1. None for the petitioner. 2. The learned Counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 to 4 points out that the School Tribunal had directed the Management - respondent No.2 to take action against the petitioner. However, that part of the order was set aside by this Court as per the Judgment dated 26.9.2008 in Writ Petition No.1822/1997. 3. The respondent No.2 - Tukaram Mahadeo Shinde has filed his affidavit in reply. In para 4, he has stated that as this Hon'ble Court has restrained 2 CP-388-09.sxw the Management from taking any disciplinary action against the petitioner, the Management has followed that order and has not defeated the same in any manner. The learned Counsel for the Management also makes a statement that neither the Management has initiated any action nor has any intention to initiate such action on the basis of the order of the School Tribunal which stands set aside by the order of the High Court. In view of this, no case is made out for action for contempt of Court. 4. Therefore, Contempt Petition stands dismissed. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)