1 Contempt Petition No.183/2006 in Writ Petition No.4545/2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO.183 OF 2006 IN WRIT PETITION NO.4545 OF 2006 Sukhlal s/o Shamrao Sonwane ... PETITIONER VERSUS Shri S.Y. Napte and others ... RESPONDENTS ..... Shri V.S. Panpatte, Advocate for petitioner – absent Shri M.K. Goyanka, Advocate for respondent No.1. Shri V.D. Tele, A.G.P. for respondent No.3. ..... CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J. DATED : 6th June, 2011. PER COURT : 1. This contempt petition alleges disobedience of the order dated 7.7.2006, passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.4545/2006. 2. This Court, by order dated 7.7.2006, quashed and set aside the order dated 18.5.2006, passed by the respondent – Corporation, thereby terminating the services of the petitioner on the sole ground that the petitioner’s tribe claim is invalidated. By order dated 7.7.2006, the respondent – Corporation was further directed to 2 Contempt Petition No.183/2006 in Writ Petition No.4545/2006 continue the services of the petitioner till decision of the Scrutiny Committee. It was further observed that, further continuation will be subject to decision of the Scrutiny Committee. So far as absence from the date of termination till reinstatement, the same shall be treated as appropriate leave that may be available to the credit of the petitioner. 3. When this matter was called out in the morning session, none appeared for the petitioner, therefore, to enable the counsel for the petitioner the matter was kept back and when it is called out for hearing in second session, however, none appears for the petitioner. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent has tendered the copy of the appointment letter across the bar and submitted that, as directed by this Court, by order dated 7.7.2006, the petitioner was reinstated in the employment of the respondent – Corporation. Learned counsel for the respondent No.1 further submitted that, since the order is complied, there is no any disobedience, much less willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court. Therefore, this Contempt Petition may be disposed of. 5. I have carefully perused the pleadings in the contempt petition and also order passed by the Division Bench and the copy of 3 Contempt Petition No.183/2006 in Writ Petition No.4545/2006 the appointment letter dated 30.10.2006 addressed to the petitioner herein by the Divisional Controller, M.S.R.T.C., Jalgaon. In my opinion, since the order of the Division Bench has been complied with, there is no any willful disobedience of order passed by the Division Bench on 7.7.2006. In the light of above, the Contempt Petition stands disposed of. Notice stands discharged. ( S.S. SHINDE, J. ) fmp/-cp183.06