1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD SUO MOTU CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 121 OF 2004 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 5035 OF 2003 The Registrar, High Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad ...Petitioner Versus 1 Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Pachora Division, Pachora, District Jalgaon 2 The Tahsildar, Chalisgaon Tq. Chalisgaon, District Jalgaon ...Respondents ..... Mr. D.R. Korde, A.G.P. for respondents ..... CORAM: S. S. SHINDE, J. DATED: 27TH AUGUST, 2010 PER COURT:- 1 Heard Mr. Korde, learned AGP for the respondents. Writ petition Nos. 5035 of 2003 and 5041 of 2003 were filed before this court. In the said petitions affidavit in replies were filed on behalf of the State on 14.1.2004. The matters came up for hearing before this 2 Court on 16.2.2004. This court directed the respondents to file fresh affidavits within two weeks in both the writ petitions. The matters were again listed for hearing on 21.4.2004. The affidavits, as directed, were not filed. Therefore, the Government Pleader requested for further time of two weeks. This court, as a last chance, had granted further two weeks time for filing fresh affidavits as a last chance. Again the matters were listed for hearing on 6.5.2004. However, no fresh affidavits as directed by this court by order dated 16.2.2004 were filed on behalf of the respondents. This Court by taking suo moto action issued notice of contempt to the respondents contemnors. In response to the said notice, the affidavit in reply is filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. 2 Learned A.G.P. appearing for the respondents invited my attention to the para 1 of the affidavit in reply and submitted that the respondents have admitted in para 1 that affidavit in reply was not filed within stipulated period or for that purpose within extended period. Respondents have tendered unconditional apology in para 1 of the affidavit in reply. Learned AGP further invited my attention to para 2 to 6 and strenuously submitted that due to reasons beyond control of the respondents, there was delay in filing further affidavit, as directed by this court by order dated 16.2.2004. Learned AGP in view of the contents of para 1 of the affidavit in reply, would urge that since the respondents tendered unconditional apology for non complying with 3 the order dated 16.2.2004, this contempt proceeding my be disposed of. 3 I have heard learned AGP at length. I have also carefully perused the affidavit in reply filed on behalf of the respondents. In para 1 of the affidavit in reply, it is stated thus, “I tender unconditional apology for the non compliance of the order dated 16.2.2004 passed by the Hon’ble High Court in writ petition No. 5035 of 2003 and request to accept the same.” I have also perused para 2 to 6 of the affidavit in reply. The respondents have explained the delay occurred in filing the affidavit in reply, in detail. Though the explanation offered in para 2 to 6 is not acceptable in toto, however, since the respondents have tendered unconditional apology for non compliance of the order dated 16.2.2004 passed by this Court in writ petition Nos. 5035 of 2003 and 5041 of 2003, In the facts and circumstances of this case, in my view, no fruitful purpose would be served in continuing the instant contempt proceeding against the respondents. It appears that there are two separate affidavit in replies filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2, however, the averments in the said affidavits are identical. 4 Taking into consideration unconditional apology tendered by the respondents and the explanation offered in the affidavit in reply, in my 4 view, no further directions or action against the respondents is warranted. In the light of the above, observations, the Contempt petition is disposed of. Rule discharged. *****