cp36.10.odt 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 36/2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 5935/2006 Bhojraj Balakrishan Khupse ..vrs.. Shailesh Hinge, Tahsildar Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders Mr.K.S.Narwade, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. Parihar, Asstt. Govt.Peader for Respondent. Coram: R. K. Deshpande, J. Date : 31 st March, 2010 This petition complains willful disobedience/breach of the order dated 21st November, 2008, passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 5935/2006. The said petition challenging the order dated 19th August, 2006 passed by the Naib Tahsildar, Sub Divisional Officer as well as Additional Collector, was dismissed. It was challenged on the ground that, under Section 155 of the Code of 1966, the Collector was empowered to correct any clerical error or any errors after giving notice to the parties concerned. However, this Court has held that there is nothing in section 155 of the Code of 1966 to hold that the Collector can correct the errors only within a particular period, as the provision itself stipulates that the Collector is empowered to correct the errors at any time. This court has held that in this case, the necessary correction was carried out after issuing notice to the cp36.10.odt 2 petitioner and after considering the objections raised on behalf of the petitioner. This court did not find any error in the impugned order dated 19th August, 2006 and hence dismissed the petition. Now, the grievance is made in the instant contempt petition that Tahsildar, Manora, is not following his own order dated 19th August, 2006, which has been confirmed by this Court in the writ petition. The Tahsildar, Manora, has issued communication dated 3.12.2006 directing the petitioner to approach the Deputy Director of Land Records for carrying out the necessary corrections and alteration in the original record. He has carried out the correction in 7/12 extract and in the record of rights. The affidavit to that effect has also been filed on 19.3.2010, enclosing therein the copies of the relevant documents, in which corrections were carried out. In view of the fact that the Tahsildar, Manora has filed the affidavit and documents showing the compliance of his own order dated 19th August, 2009, there is no question of contempt and the petitioner is at liberty to approach the concerned authorities for carrying out the corrections in the other records. The contempt petition is, therefore, dismissed. J UDGE Rvjalit