1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH NAGPUR. C.P.NO.26 of 2009 IN W.P.NO.476 of 2008 (d) Mr.Shrikrushna Akaram Thorat ..vs.. Namdeo Miraji Shirsat and ors. Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order Mr.G.R.Sadar Adv. for the petitioner. Mr.Anjan De Adv. for R.1 and 3. Mr.Shinge Ad. for respondent no.2. CORAM: Smt. R. P. SondurBaldota, J. DATED : 26th February, 2010. By this contempt petition, the petitioner alleges that the respondents be prosecuted for contempt of the court for having willfully violated order dated 20th of October, 2008 passed by this court in W.P.No.476 of 2008. During the pendency of the proceedings, pursuant to the orders passed by this court on 15th of January, 2010 and 9th of January, 2010, respondents no.1 and 3 had handed over the records of the school thereby partly complying with the above order. For the day in complying with the orders respondents no.1 and 3 have filed affidavits tendering unconditional apology. The same is accepted by this court. 2 As regards the issue of back wages, Mr.Anjan De, the learned counsel for the respondents, submits that these respondents have already preferred L.P.A.No.63 of 2009 which has been admitted on 12th of June, 2009. For that reason, these respondents have not paid the back wages to the petitioner. Considering these facts and circumstances of the case and in particular compliance of the order as regards handing over the charge of the school to the petitioner as headmaster and pendency of the Letters Patent Appeal, in my opinion, no further action against the respondents is called for in the present proceedings except for award of costs. Respondents no.1 and 3 are directed to pay costs quantified at Rs.5000/- each to the petitioner. The contempt petition is dismissed. The notices issued to respondents no.1 and 3 are discharged. In view of the disposal of the petition Mr.Anjan De states that respondents no.1 and 3 do not press C.A.No.93 of 2009. The same is accordingly disposed of. C.A.No.94 of 2009 and Pursis St.Nos.1194/2010 and 1342/2010 do not survive. The same are accordingly disposed of. JUDGE. chute