{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO.34 OF 2010 IN CIVIL APPLICATION NO.11383 OF 2003 IN WRIT PETITION NO.4544 OF 2003 Shaikh Anis Shaikh Munir Petitioner Versus Fakirchand Balasaheb Lahane and two others Respondents Mr.P.A.Kulkarni, advocate for the petitioner. Mr.P.M.Shah, Senior Counsel for respondents CORAM : R.M.BORDE, J. DATE : 30 th March, 2011 PER COURT: 1 The petitioner is alleging violation of the order passed by this Court in Writ Petition Nos.4483/2003 and 5296/2006. Admittedly petitioner was not party to both these petitions. 2 It is the contention of petitioner that there are general directions issued by this Court in respect of providing work to the senior employees in preference to the junior employees. 3 An affidavit-in-reply is presented by the respondents wherein it is stated that the respondents are trying to provide work to the senior employees who report at the time of commencement {2} of any new work based on the requirement. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents also makes a statement that as and when the work is available, the employees would be provided with work as per the requirement, so also in accordance with the claim based on their seniority. 4 It is also worth noting that there were about 12 contempt petitions presented previously touching the same subject and those were disposed of with similar observations. 5 Considering the statement made by the respondents in the affidavit-in-reply, this contempt petition does not deserve any consideration and same stands disposed of. R.M.BORDE JUDGE adb/cp3410