cp144.06 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 144 OF 2006 Smt. Harjeet Kaur Daljitsingh Renukadevi Clothing Industries, Ahmednagar ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ...Respondents ..... Mr. S.M. Godsay, advocate for petitioner Mr. S.D. Kaldate, A.G.P. for respondent No.1. Mr. B. N. Patil, advocate for Respondent No.2. ..... CORAM: R.M. BORDE, J. DATED: 25TH APRIL, 2011 PER COURT:- 1 The petitioner is making grievance in respect of willful disobedience of the order passed in writ petition No. 5108 of 2003 decided on 27.1.2006. The Division Bench of this court while disposing of writ petition, granted permission to the petitioner to move the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad by making representation and by putting forth his claim for balance of the amount. It was further directed to the Chief Executive Officer to consider such representation, cp144.06 -2- if received, in accordance with law having regard to the terms of agreement and guidelines contained in the Government Resolution dated 4.2.1999, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such representation. 2 An affidavit in reply has been presented by the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Washim. The Chief Executive Officer has recorded reasons for delay in disposal of representation in para 6 of the affidavit in reply. I have gone through the explanation tendered by the respondent while setting forth the reasons for occurrence of delay in deciding representation. I am of the opinion that the reasons given by the Chief Executive Officer for causing delay in deciding representation are convincing and acceptable. It is also stated by the Chief Executive Officer in his affidavit that the representation tendered by the petitioner is considered and decided on 30.8.2006. A copy of order passed by the Chief Executive Officer is also annexed to the affidavit in reply. Considering all these aspects I am of the view that the instant contempt petition does not deserve any consideration in view of the decision rendered by the Chief Executive Officer. The contempt petition, therefore, stands disposed of. Notice discharged. ( R.M. BORDE. J.) rlj/ cp144.06 -3-