1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 28/2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 5628/2009 (Ratnadeep Lalchand Rangari vrs. Shri B.V.Gopal Reddy, the Divisional Commissioner, and another) ................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ................................................................................................................................................... Shri M.I.Dhatrak, counsel for petitioner Shri A.M.Deshpande, AGP, for respondents. ... CORAM : R. K.DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 29th MARCH, 2011. This contempt petition complains about willful disobedience and breach of the order dated 16th June, 2010, passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No. 5628/2009. This Court had recorded the statement of the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondent nos. 1 and 2 that an enquiry has been initiated and will be completed within six weeks from that date. On the basis of this statement, the petition was disposed of. It is alleged in this petition which is filed on 28th 2 January, 2011 that the enquiry has not been completed, in spite of reminder dated 21.12.2010 issued by the petitioner. In response to the contempt petition, the respondents have filed an affidavit of the Collector and also that of the Divisional Commissioner stating that the enquiry has been completed and the report has been submitted by the Sub Divisional Officer on 27.10.2010. Thus the order passed by this Court on 16th June, 2010, stands complied with. Shri Dhatrak, the learned counsel submits that there was delay in conducting the enquiry and submitting the report. According to him, as per the statement, the enquiry was to be completed within six weeks from 16th June, 2010. Although the period of six weeks expired, there was no application for extension of time filed by the respondent to complete the enquiry. The respondents have tendered 3 unconditional apology for the delay caused in conducting the enquiry. However, in order to show that the non-compliance or breach of the order is willful, what is required to be shown is that, in spite of repeated reminders, the respondents have either failed to get the time extended or to complete the enquiry within the stipulated period. The only reminder sent by the petitioner is dated 21.12.2010 and by that time the enquiry was already over. In view of this, it cannot be said that there was intentional or willful breach of the order passed by this Court. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. It is however open for the petitioner to challenge the enquiry in appropriate proceedings if so advised and the dismissal of this contempt petition shall not come in the way of the petitioner. JUDGE Rvjalit