1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. Contempt Petition No.88 of 2001 In Writ Petition No.1159 of 2000 The Security Guards Board for Greater Bombay and Thane Dist. ... ... Petitioners (Orig. Respondents) v/s. M/s.Alsecure and Protection Services (India) & ors. .. ... ... Respondents (Orig. Petitioners) Mrs.L. Desai for petitioners. None for respondents. ----- CORAM : SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J. Dated : 21 st April 2008 P.C. : 1. An interim order came to be passed in this writ petition initially on 17.11.2000. Under that order, it has been clarified that exemption is granted to the Security Agencies in January 2000 and the Security Agencies have become disentitled to continue to operate their Agencies. They were, however, allowed to continue for a period of 2 months or until their application for exemption was considered by the State Government, whichever was earlier. Consequently, they were granted an allowances to continue the Agencies at best for a period of 2 months from 17.11.2000. 2 2. On 25.1.2001, a further order came to be passed, under which, inter alia, they were to pay 3% administration charges of the Board. They were allowed to continue their business upon, inter alia, the condition that they deposited 3% administrative charges of the Board within four weeks from the date of that oder. The deposit was subject to the outcome of Writ Petition No.1658 of 1999. 3. The Writ Petition is pending. The deposit is not made by respondent Nos.3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 21 and 22. The other respondents have deposited as directed. 4. The petitioners allege the contempt of the order dated 25.1.2001 by willful disobedience. 5. It is true that the petitioners were directed to continue their business only upon the deposit being made within 4 weeks from 25.1.2001. The Agencies cannot continue their business on account of the failure to pay deposit. It is, therefore, argued on behalf of the petitioners that all the Agencies must be restrained from continuing their business. Such order can be passed in an application in the writ petition itself. In any event, the deposit was subject to the outcome of the writ petition. I do not find any contempt of 3 the order of the Court to require any action being taken for civil contempt. However, the petitioners will be at liberty to make whatever application they deem fit in the writ petition for directions therein. 6. The Contempt Petition is disposed of accordingly. [SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J.]