:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE CONTEMPT PETITION NO.408 OF 2007 CONTEMPT PETITION NO.408 OF 2007 CONTEMPT PETITION NO.408 OF 2007 Mr. Raju Kakumal Rizwani ...Petitioner. v. 1. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents. Mr.R.S.Apte i/by N.R.Bubna, , advs. for the Petitioner. Ms.Vaidehi Mhaispurkar, A.G.P. for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Shri Rajendra Raghuvanshi, A.S.G. with N.D.Mishra and Ms.Rutuja Ambekar, advs. for the Respondent Nos.3 to 10. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. J.H.BHATIA,J. J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE: 2nd April, 2008. DATE: 2nd April, 2008. DATE: 2nd April, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the Parties. 2. Mr.Raghuvanshi the learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the respondent nos.3 to 10 points out that the present petitioner was not a party to the Public Interest Litigation No.52 of 2006 and his application for intervention in that PIL is not yet decided and he also points out that the respondent nos.4 to 10 were not even parties to that PIL. In view of this, petitioner can not file this contempt petition. 3. In view of the above circumstances, I find that as long as application filed by the petitioner for :2: liberty to intervene in the PIL is not decided, he does not get any right to file contempt petition before this Court. Petitioner shall be at liberty to file fresh contempt petition after his application for intervention is decided. 4. Contempt Petition stands disposed off. (J.H.BHATIA,J.) (J.H.BHATIA,J.) (J.H.BHATIA,J.)