-1- IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION FARAD FARAD FARAD CONTINUNATION SHEET CONTINUNATION SHEET CONTINUNATION SHEET CONTEMPT CONTEMPT CONTEMPT PETITION NO.443 OF 2006, PETITION NO.443 OF 2006, PETITION NO.443 OF 2006, CONTEMPT CONTEMPT CONTEMPT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.444 OF 2006 NO.444 OF 2006 NO.444 OF 2006 AND AND AND CONTEMPT CONTEMPT CONTEMPT PETITION NO.445 OF 2006 PETITION NO.445 OF 2006 PETITION NO.445 OF 2006 ............................................................. ............................................................. ............................................................. Office Notes,Office Office Notes,Office Office Notes,Office memorandum of Coram, memorandum of Coram, memorandum of Coram, appearances,Court’s appearances,Court’s appearances,Court’s Court’s Court’s Court’s or or or orders or directions orders or directions orders or directions Judge’s Judge’s Judge’s orders orders orders & Registrar’s orders. & Registrar’s orders. & Registrar’s orders. ............................................................. ............................................................. ............................................................. Mr.Mihir Desai for the Petitioner Mr.R.S.Apte a/w Mr.M.S.Lagu for Respondent No.1 Mr.R.A.Rodrigues for Respondent No.2. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.S.OKA, J. A.S.OKA, J. A.S.OKA, J. DATE DATE DATE : MARCH 30,2007. : MARCH 30,2007. : MARCH 30,2007. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. The breach alleged is of following part of the order dated 8th February 2006 passed by the Division Bench of this Court : . The Respondent No.2 College shall complete the process of dereserving the posts in question within a period of three months from today. Upon dereservation of the said post, the appointment shall be made as per the guide-lines provided in Circular dated 17th July 1996 of the Respondents within a period of three months -2- therefore." 2. There is an Affidavit filed by the first Respondent stating that in terms of order passed by the Division Bench of this Court, necessary proposal was forwarded by the first Respondent herein to the University of Mumbai. There is an Affidavit filed by the Registrar of University of Mumbai in which it is stated that upon receipt of the relevant proposal from the first Respondent vide letter dated 17th March 2003, a detailed scrutiny was carried out and on 21st November 2006, a recommendation for dereservation has been submitted by the University of Mumbai to the Higher and Technical Education Department of the State Government. It is stated that the matter is pending with the State Government. 3. Considering the aforesaid facts, it is very difficult to come to the conclusion that there is any wilful or deliberate breach of the order dated 8th February 2006 passed by this Court. It is obvious -3- that now the State Government will have to take a decision on the proposal for regularisation expeditiously considering the directions contained in the order dated 8th February 2006. 4. No case is made out for taking action under the Contempt of Courts Act,1971. Accordingly, notice issued to the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 is discharged. Petitions are disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE