HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHNAD, AT NAINITAL Civil Misc. Contempt Application No.38 of 2009 Shamim Ahmad Khan aged about 59 years s/o Sri Shafiq Ahmad R/o 8/83 Near Jain Dharamshala, Vikas Nagar, Dehradun District Dehradun …….Petitioner Versus Manisha Pawar, Secretary Social Welfare Department Civil Secretariat, Uttarakhand Dehradun ……Respondent Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K. C. Tiwari, Advocate for the respondent. Hon’ble J. C. S. Rawat, J. The petition under section 12 of the Contempt of Court Act has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer to punish the respondent for the violation of order dated 29.07.2008 passed by this Court in Writ petition No.770 of 2008 (S/S) “Shamim Ahmad Khan Vs. State of Uttarakhand & others”. Vide order dated 29.07.2008 passed in W.P. No.770/2008 (S/S), this Court while summarily disposing of the petition directed the respondent to take a decision on the representation dated 28.05.2007, made by the petitioner to the said authority, within a period of three months from the date of certified copy of that order is produced before such authority. The respondent has filed the counter affidavit in which it has been stated that the representation dated 28.05.2007 made by the petitioner has been decided vide order dated 26.03.2009 and the said representation was dismissed. As such, the respondent has complied with the order. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the direction was made on 29.07.2008 and after filing the contempt petition before this Court the 2 representation of the petitioner was decided on 26.03.2009. As such, the respondent has committed a contempt of Court for the said period. The respondent has filed an affidavit stating therein that she cannot even imagine to flout or disobey the orders passed by the Hon’ble Court. It was further stated in the counter affidavit that the deponent has not committed any contempt of the order of this Court and the allegations made by the petitioner are wholly misconceived and incorrect. It was further stated that if this Hon’ble Court technically found that the deponent has committed any contempt, the deponent tenders her unconditional apology and prays tat the contempt notice issued against her may kindly be discharged and the contempt petition be dismissed accordingly. After due consideration of the contents of the documents filed by the parties; the fact that the representation of the petitioner has already been decided; and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the contempt petition is liable to be dismissed and is dismissed accordingly. However, a liberty is given to the petitioner to file a fresh writ petition before the competent court. (J. C. S. Rawat, J.) Dated 15.05.2009 LSR