IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17 OF 2006 IN CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 92 OF 2005 CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 92 OF 2005 CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 92 OF 2005 Pathan Harun Abdul Sattar & Ors. .. Petitioners Versus Nashik District Maratha Vidya Prasarak Samaj & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. Mandar Limaye for the Petitioners. Mr. Satyajeet M.Mirajkar i/b. K.Y.Mandlik for Respondent No.1. Mrs. S.S.Bhende, AGP, for Respondent Nos. 2 & 3. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. DATE : 31st January, 2007. DATE : 31st January, 2007. DATE : 31st January, 2007. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. The Application is allowed in terms of prayer cluse (a). Amendment be carried out in the course of the day. -- (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CONTEMPT PETITION ORDER NO. 92 OF 2005 CONTEMPT PETITION ORDER NO. 92 OF 2005 CONTEMPT PETITION ORDER NO. 92 OF 2005 Pathan Harun Abdul Sattar & Ors. .. Petitioners Versus Nashik District Maratha Vidya Prasarak Samaj & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. Mandar Limaye for the Petitioners. Mr. Satyajeet M. Mirajkar i/b. K.Y.Mandlik for Respondent No.1. Mrs. S.S.Bhende, AGP, for Respondents 2 & 3. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. DATE : 31st January, 2007. DATE : 31st January, 2007. DATE : 31st January, 2007. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. The grievance remained unaddressed is only in respect of Petitioner No.3. The Respondent No.2 is not present in Court. Mere filing of reply affidavit is not enough. As per Rules, the contemnor is required to remain present at the hearing of the Contempt Petition. 2. In the circumstances, Counsel for the Respondents seeks time so that Respondent No.2 can remain present at the hearing. 3. Accordingly, stand over to 23rd February, 2007. ---- (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.)