1 Contempt Petition No.173/2006 in Writ Petition No.1785/2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO.173 OF 2006 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1785 OF 2006 Sambhaji s/o Satwa Waghmare ... PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & ors. ... RESPONDENTS ..... Shri P.G. Rodge, Advocate for petitioner – absent Shri D.R. Kale, A.G.P. for respondent No.1. ..... CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J. DATED : 6th June, 2011. PER COURT : 1. When this matter is called out for hearing, none appears for the petitioner. 2. The learned A.G.P. invited my attention to the affidavit-in-reply filed by one Mr. Arun Jagannath Thakare, working as Deputy Director of Education, Latur Region, Latur on the relevant date. In para No.10 of the affidavit-in-reply, it is stated that, the proposal of the petitioner was forwarded to the Director of Education, Maharashtra State, Pune and 2 Contempt Petition No.173/2006 in Writ Petition No.1785/2006 copy of the said proposal was directly sent to the State Government. In para 14 of the affidavit-in-reply, it is stated that the petitioner’s services have been approved and he has been paid regular salary with arrears. In para 15, it is further stated that the order passed by this Court on 18.4.2006 in Writ Petition No.1785/2006 has been complied with. It is further stated that there is some delay in complying the order of this Court. However, said delay was not intentional and it caused due to procedure to be followed in the Government office. In para 3 of the affidavit- in-reply, unconditional apology is tendered by the respondent. 3. Upon careful perusal of the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the respondent No.2, it is abundantly clear that, order passed by this Court has been complied with. It is true that there is some delay in complying with the order, however, said delay cannot be said to be intentional. Therefore, in my opinion, since the order of this Court has been complied with and unconditional apology is tendered by the respondent No.2 for the delay caused in complying with the order, nothing remains to be decided in this Contempt Petition. Therefore, the Contempt Petition is 3 Contempt Petition No.173/2006 in Writ Petition No.1785/2006 disposed of in the light of affidavit-in-reply filed by the respondent No.2. Notice stands discharged. ( S.S. SHINDE, J. ) fmp/-cp173.06