1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR Contempt Petition No.150 OF 2009 in Writ Petition NO. 114 of 2009 (D) (Jagran Gramin Vikas Sanstha+1 ..vs.. J.S.Sharia, Pri.Secy., Hr. & Tech. Edu. Deptt., Mumbai) =-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Mr. F.T.Mirza, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. Nitin Sambre, Govt. Pleader for the Respondent Respondent present in person. Mr. M.V.Samarth, Advocate for Intervener C ORAM : Smt.R.P.SondurBaldota, J. DATED : 09th February, 2010. This petition is filed for action in contempt against the respondent, who is Principal Secretary, Higher and Technical Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai, for non-compliance with the order dated 5th February, 2009, passed in Writ Petition No. 114 of 2009. The said order directed the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of the order or within a period of six weeks from the date of knowledge of the order. As per the additional affidavit filed by the respondent, he learnt about the order only on 27th February, 2009. However, the consideration of the representation was not within the period of time granted. The period of six weeks from that date expired on 10th April, 2009 and the representation came to be decided on 2 16th December, 2009. It is thus seen that there is undoubtedly non-compliance of the directions issued vide order dated 5/2/2009. However, after considering the extensive arguments advanced by both the sides and also perusal of the affidavits filed by the parties and the fact that the representation of the petitioner stands considered, I am inclined to dispose of the petition only with a direction to the respondent to pay costs quantified at Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the petitioner. The costs shall be paid by the respondent within a period of two weeks from today. Mr. M.V.Samarth, the learned counsel for Intervener, states that he does not press Civil Application No. 7/2010 in view of separate Contempt Petition filed by him. The same is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE. Diwale