1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PEITTION NO.1797 OF 2009 Shri Sunil Mehta, Divisional Engineer (EN), MG, South Central Railway, At Post and Dist.Nanded and others .. Petitioners Versus Shri Rama s/o Narayan Pundge .. Respondent Shri P.G.Godhamgaonkar, Advocate for petitioners Shri V.J.Dixit, Senior Counsel with Mrs.Sanjivani Deshmukh- Ghate, Advocate for respondent-Sole CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND A.V. POTDAR, JJ. DATE : 9th September 2009 PER COURT : 1. This is a petition which takes exception to the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal issuing notice of contempt on the basis of an application i.e. Original Application No.373 of 2006 filed by the present respondent. Since the present petitioners had not obeyed the directions of the Tribunal in respect of reinstatement together with back-wages, the present respondent has filed the aforesaid contempt petition. The petitioners, accordingly, have filed the present writ petition challenging the order of the Tribunal issuing notice to the present petitioners. The contempt notice calls upon the present 2 petitioners to reinstate the respondent with back-wages; failing which to remain present before the Tribunal on the date specified in the said notice. While issuing notice in this petition and granting interim relief as was prayed for by the petitioners in this petition, this Court had directed the present petitioners to deposit the back-wages payable in the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal and accordingly, the petitioners have deposited an amount of Rs.5,84,502/- in this Court some time in May 2009. In the light of the order which has been passed by us in Writ Petition No.1802 of 2009, dismissing the aforesaid petition, according to us, the present petition which is against the notice of contempt issued by the Central Administrative Tribunal is certainly not maintainable. The petitioners have adequate remedy of hearing before the Tribunal and filing their reply and contend that no contempt has been committed by them. In any event, the proceedings of contempt petition i.e. the question whether the petitioners have committed contempt of the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal cannot be decided by this Court in the light of the fact that the contempt proceedings are pending before the Tribunal. 2. We accordingly dismiss this petition and continue the interim relief for a period of two weeks from today to enable the petitioners to take such steps as are available to them in law of 3 submitting whatever reply petitioners desire to file before the Tribunal. The interim relief which we have continued would stand automatically vacated after the period specified above. Writ Petition is summarily dismissed with no orders as to costs. ( A.V.POTDAR, J.) ( P.V.HARDAS, J.) vvr/1797.09wp