IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 133 OF 2005 Rashtriya Shikshan Sangh .. Petitioner versus Special District Social Welfare Officer & ors .. Respondents ... Mr.N.V. Bandiwadekar for the petitioner. Mrs.G.P. Mulekar AGP for respondent nos.1 to 3. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 7th October 2006 DATED : 7th October 2006 DATED : 7th October 2006 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard counsel. 2. The petitioner runs a primary Ashram school as well as secondary Ashram School. The petitioner had made an application for opening of a secondary Ashram school. That application was rejected. The order of rejection was challenged by the petitioner for filing Writ Petition no.9841 of 2004. By an order dated 31st January 2005, this court permitted the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to make an application to the government again. The Court observed that if fresh application was made, the Government would consider the same on its own merits. According to the petitioner in pursuance of the liberty given by the Division Bench of this Court by its order dated 31st January 2005 in Writ Petition no.9841 of 2004, the petitioner made a fresh application for permission to open a secondary school. This was done on 16th February 2005. Petitioner has filed this Contempt Petition alleging that the respondent has not decided the same and has thereby committed contempt of the court. 3. By filing an affidavit in reply dated 16th September 2005, the respondent has stated that the application made by petitioner was duly considered and has been rejected by the government resolution dated 6th September 2006. A copy of the government resolution dated 6th September 2005 is annexed to the affidavit. The government resolution states that the Government has taken a policy decision to start the government hostel for the VJNT students and therefore, the application of the petitioner cannot be considered. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the wording of the resolution shows that the government has not considered its application. In my view, the government resolution must be read as a whole. The government resolution refers in the petitioner’s application for opening of the Ashram school for the students belonging to VJNT category. The resolution then states that the government has decided to start its own hostel for students belonging to VJNT category and therefore, petitioners application cannot be considered. In my view, the resolution means that the application of the petitioner was not granted. 5. The petitioners’ application has been rejected in view of the policy decision of the government to open its own hostel. There is thus no merit in the contempt petition which is hereby dismissed. (D.G. KARNIK, J) (D.G. KARNIK, J) (D.G. KARNIK, J)