IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.238 OF 2005 IN WRIT PETITION NO.6992 OF 2004 Smt.Hemlata Balwant Gaikwad ...Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents ...... Mr.Ashok Tajane i/b Mr.P.B.Shaligram for Petitioner. Mr.A.H.Palekar, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1. ...... CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. JULY 6, 2006. JULY 6, 2006. JULY 6, 2006. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. As direction issued by this Court stands complied with, it is not necessary to precipitate the matter any further. Hence, Petition disposed of. Notices issued to Respondents stand discharged. 2. In view of the explanation offered by Shri J.V.Giri, Manager, Government Photozinco Press, : 2 : Pune, Respondent No.3 herein in the affidavit dated 20th March 2006, in particular, Paragraph 3, though that cannot be sufficient cause, as it was expected that prior permission to leave the Court ought to have been taken by the contemnor or formal application moved for dispensing with the appearance, however, in the fact situation of the present case, it is not necessary to precipitate the matter any further. 3. Although the explanation has been offered by the person who was responsible for forwarding the copy of the affidavit to the Government Pleader, the same is not sufficient explanation. Even so, it is left to the concerned Authority to consider what steps should be taken to avoid such situation in future. A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.