1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 352 OF 2010 IN CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 58 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 6691 OF 2008 Pratap Prabhaji Kshirsagar and others ...Petitioners Versus The State of Maharashtra and another ...Respondents ..... Mr. G.K. Naik Thingle, advocate for the petitioners Mrs. V.A. Shinde, A.G.P. for respondents ..... CORAM: S. S. SHINDE, J. DATED: 26TH OCTOBER, 2010 PER COURT:- 1 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned A.G.P. for the respondents. 2 In pursuance to the show cause notices dated 21.10.2010, the respondents are present before this Court. Learned A.G.P. has tendered separate affidavit in replies filed by both the respondents. In both the affidavit in replies, the respondents have tendered 2 unconditional apology for the delay and inconvenience caused to this Court for not complying with the undertaking given to this Court by not forwarding the Reference to the competent Court within one month. It is stated in the affidavit in replies that the order dated 21.4.2010 passed by this Court, is complied with by sending Reference to the competent Court on 13.10.2010. However, the respondents have admitted that the said reference was not forwarded to the competent court within one month from 21.4.2010 and therefore, the respondents have tendered unconditional apology. In para 5 of the affidavit in replies, the respondents have stated that they will abide abide by the undertaking and comply with the orders as per the undertaking given to this Court, within stipulated period, in future. 3 In fact, the earlier contempt petition was disposed of on the basis of the undertaking filed by the respondents to the effect that they will forward the reference to the Reference Court within four weeks from 21.4.2010. Since the affidavit in replies are filed on behalf of the respondents therein tendering unconditional apology and further giving assurance to this Court that in future, if any undertaking is given to this Court, they will abide the same within stipulated period, as mentioned in the undertaking. However, the fact remains that the petitioners were compelled to file the present contempt petition due to inaction on the part of the respondents in not complying with the undertaking given by them while disposing of the earlier contempt petition. 3 4 Since unconditional apology is tendered by the respondents and further assurance is given that they will abide by the undertaking, if any given before this Court, within stipulated period mentioned in the undertaking, the show cause notices issued to the respondents deserve to be discharged. However, as stated herein above, due to inaction on the part of the respondents in not complying with the undertaking, the petitioners have filed this contempt petition and therefore, the petitioners are entitled for some costs from the respondents. In the light of the above, this is a fit case in which personal costs can be imposed upon the respondents. 5 In the result, the show cause notices issued to the respondents stand discharged subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) from each of the respondents towards the personal costs. The said costs amount of Rs.10,000/- is to be deposited by them in the Registry of this court on or before 28.10.2010. The order imposing personal costs is fortified by the view taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs (Port) Kolkata Vs. Cosmo Steel Private Limited and others, reported in (2007) 15 SCC 619. 6 Needless to mention that the respondents are not entitle to get reimbursement of the costs amount of Rs.5000/- each from the 4 Government Treasury. It means they will have to pay the costs amount from their own pocket out of their income. 7 With the above observations, contempt petition stands disposed of. Show cause notices stand discharged. ( S. S. SHINDE. J.) rlj/