1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 132 OF 2009. Manisha d/o Udaram Gajbhiye Vs. Dr. Shreekar Pardeshi Collector Akola ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's Orders directions and Registrar's orders. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Smt. M. P. Munshi Adv for petitioner. Shri N. W. Sambre GP for respondent. CORAM: C. L. PANGARKAR J. DATED: 4 th NOVEMBER, 2009. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the respondent. Petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 2828 of 2008. The Court had passed an order directing the respondent to decide the representation submitted by the petitioner on 08.05.2008 within a period of 4 weeks. It is the contention of the petitioner that the said representation was not infact decide within 4 weeks which has compelled the petitioner to file this 2 application for contempt. Respondent has filed reply and affidavit. From the said affidavit it is clear that respondent has infact taken a decision on the representation as is clear from communication dated 22.08.2008 as well as 06.10.2009. Petitioner disputes having received communication dated 22.08.2008, however petitioner does not dispute having received communication dated 06.10.2009. Respondent has placed on record xerox copy of the communication dated 22.08.2008 which also bears an outward number. There is no reason to doubt the genuineness of the letter. In view of this, fact remains that decision with regard to the representation was taken within the time stipulated. Nothing therefore survives in the petition. Contempt stands disposed off. Notice stands discharged. JUDGE svk