8.CP.218-08 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PEITION NO.218 OF 2008 IN WRIT PETITION NO.3914 OF 2007 Anish Co-operative Hsg. Society Ltd. ..Petitioner. Versus Shri Narendra Rane, Asst. Director Town Planning, Thane and 2 others. ..Respondents. .......................... None for the Petitioner. Mr.A.I. Shaikh, A.G.P. for the Respondent - State. Mr.Mandar Limaye, Advocate i/b. Mr.R.S. Apte, Advocate for Respondent No.2. .......................... CORAM : A.R. JOSHI, JJ. DATE : 24 th SEPTEMBER, 2009. P.C. :- 1. None appears for the petitioner in this Contempt Petition. Learned Advocates for respondent Nos.2 & 3 are present. It appears that on 26 th November, 2007 the Division Bench of this Court passed certain order in Writ Petition No.3914 of 2007 preferred by the present petitioner. By the said order, certain directions and a scheme was given to the Town Planning Authority and also to the Municipal Corporation to reconsider the proposal of new layout plan in accordance with law and to pass fresh reasoned order. Directions were also given that such fresh order was to be passed after 8.CP.218-08 2 considering the objections, if any, raised by the petitioner. In the present Contempt Petition in paragraph No.9, it is specifically alleged that the authorities had reconsidered the proposal but deliberately failed and neglected to consider the objections raised by the petitioner – Society regarding want of consent of the flat purchasers. According to the petitioner this was the gross contempt for not considering the objections in the manner the petitioner wanted. It must be said that had such reconsideration of the proposal passed by the Authority without even hearing the petitioner then there could have been grievance for violation of the order of the Division Bench. However, admittedly, according to the petitioner the hearing was given, however, the objections were not considered. Whether to pass any order for reconsideration is an aspect of merits of the matter and appreciation of the material before the Competent Authority and it cannot be said that there was any violation of the directions of the Division Bench. Needless to mention that by the order of the Division Bench, liberty was given to the petitioner to take appropriate action if he is not satisfied with the order of the Competent Authority. In this view of the matter, there is nothing in the Contempt Petition and the same is dismissed and disposed of as such. [A.R.JOSHI,J.]