... 1 ... IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT CONTEMPT CONTEMPT PETITION NO.142 OF 2007 PETITION NO.142 OF 2007 PETITION NO.142 OF 2007 .................................................................. Office notes, office memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s Court’s or Judge’s orders. orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. .................................................................. Shri A.P.Vanarse for the Petitioner. CORAM CORAM CORAM : ABHAY S.OKA, J. : ABHAY S.OKA, J. : ABHAY S.OKA, J. DATED DATED DATED : APRIL 18, 2007. : APRIL 18, 2007. : APRIL 18, 2007. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard Advocate for the Petitioner. In the Petition the Petitioner has alleged that the Respondents have committed breach of following part of the direction contained in order dated 20th January, 2006: ". We make it clear that if the Petitioner appears for the fresh interview, her case should be considered independently and irrespective of what has been set out in the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, which rejected the case of the Petitioner". 2. It is obvious that the said direction will apply as and when the Petitioner appears for fresh ... 2 ... interview held after the date of passing the order. It is not the case made out in the Petition that the Petitioner has appeared for a fresh interview after 20th January, 2006 and that his case has not been considered. The order cannot be read to mean that a direction was issued by the Division bench that a fresh interview should be held. The direction will apply as and when Petitioner appears for the fresh interview which may be held after 20th January, 2006. 3. Hence, no case is made out for taking action under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Petition is disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE