1 Contempt Petition No.466/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO.466 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO.6003 OF 2010 Siddiqui Abdul Fahim s/o Abdul Aleem ... PETITIONER VERSUS ShaikhAbdul Karims/o Shaikh Ismail and another ... RESPONDENTS ..... Shri V.V. Bhavthankar, Advocate for petitioner Shri Vivek Dhage, Advocate for respondents ..... CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J. DATED : 18th July, 2011. PER COURT : 1. This Contempt Petition alleges disobedience of the order dated 9.7.2010, passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No.6003/2010. 2. It is the contention of the counsel appearing for the petitioner that the dismissal order was set aside by the School Tribunal. Against that, Writ Petition was preferred by the respondents. However, in the said Writ Petition, again matter is remitted back to the School Tribunal. According to the counsel for 2 Contempt Petition No.466/2010 the petitioner, the entire period from 5.1.2005 till date should be treated as a period of suspension. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the judgment and order of the School Tribunal setting aside the dismissal order of the petitioner was set aside by this Court with direction to the School Tribunal to hear the appeal afresh after giving opportunity to the parties and then pass the appropriate order. Therefore, in respectful submission of the counsel for the respondents, the order of dismissal is in existence. Therefore, the period for which the petitioner was under suspension was form January 2005 till 20.1.2007. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for the suspension amount for that period only. He further submits that, the amount of Rs. 64,000/- has been deposited before the School Tribunal. 4. Upon hearing learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondents, in my opinion, upon reading the order of this Court, of which disobedience has been alleged in this Contempt Petition, the direction to deposit the suspension amount does relate to the period from January 2005 till 20.1.2007. The School Tribunal is directed to have de novo enquiry in the matter and decide the 3 Contempt Petition No.466/2010 appeal afresh. Therefore, having been set aside the order of the School Tribunal by this Court, the order of dismissal remains intact and unless the same is subsequently set aside and Tribunal holds contrary to it and directs the enquiry afresh, in that case only the petitioner’s contention can be accepted. However, upon perusal of the order, of which disobedience is alleged and averments in the petition, and further hearing the learned counsel appearing for the respondents, in my opinion, there is no contempt as such. The amount for the period January 2005 till 20.1.2007, for which the petitioner was under suspension, has been deposited in the School Tribunal. In that view of the matter, Contempt Petition stands disposed of. Notice stands discharged. ( S.S. SHINDE, J. ) fmp/cp466.10