1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.47 OF 2008 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1438 OF 2007 Shri Durgadevi Temple Trust and Committee ..... Petitioners. V/s The Commissioner of Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Anr. ...... Respondents. ----- Mr. Sushil Chaurasia i/b Mr. A.M. Sarogi for the petitioners. Ms. Shobha Ajitkumar for respondents – BMC. ------ CORAM: V.M. KANADE, J. DATE : 11th SEPTEMBER, 2008 P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners and the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent – BMC. 2. The allegation made by the petitioner in the Petition is that, in spite of the order passed by this Court dated 26th July, 2007 in Writ Petition 1438 of 2007, the respondent – Corporation has not decided the representation filed by the petitioners herein. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent – BMC, on the other hand, has submitted that the petitioners herein were given hearing by the Assistant Commissioner and the order was passed within 8 weeks as 2 directed by this Court. However, the order was not communicated to the petitioners by the Ward Officer. 3. In view of the statement made and in view of the order being supplied to the petitioners, this Contempt Petition does not survive. Contempt Petition is accordingly disposed of. Liberty is granted to the petitioners to take out appropriate proceedings to challenge the said order. (V.M. KANADE, J.) 3