1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO.172 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.5645 OF 2005 Arun s/o Rangnathrao Dhokte ... PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and others ... RESPONDENTS ..... Shri M.S. Chaudhari, Advocate for the petitioner Shri M.L. Dharashive, A.G.P. for R.No.1. ..... CORAM : S.P. DAVARE, J. DATED : 17th June, 2009. ORAL ORDER: 1. Perused. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents have committed breach of order passed by Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.5645/2005 on 21.9.2005 by issuing subsequent suspension order on 8.4.2009 and, therefore the petitioner has filed the present Contempt Petition. 3. However, on perusal of the contents of the order passed in Writ Petition No.5645/2009, dated 21.9.2005, it is seen that the operative part of the said order reads as follows : 2 Rule returnable six weeks. “ In the meanwhile, interim relief of stay to the impugned order dated 8.8.2005 placing the petitioner under suspension. The learned counsel for the respondents accept notice of Rule.” 4. Thus, in view of the aforesaid order, it is apparently clear that the impugned order dated 8.8.2005, placing the petitioner under suspension was stayed by the said order. Thereafter the respondents have passed the order dated 8.4.2009 and thereby suspended the petitioner which apparently gives fresh cause of action to the petitioner and apparently that would not amount to any contempt of the order passed in Writ Petition No.5645/2005, dated 21.9.2005 and the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the same before appropriate forum. 5. Hence, in view of the said position, there is no substance in the present Contempt Petition. 6. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner requested to convert the present Contempt Petition into Civil Application in Writ Petition No.5645/2005. However, the petitioner is at liberty to prefer a separate Civil Application in the 3 said Writ Petition and there is no necessity to convert the present Contempt Petition into Civil Application. Therefore, the request is rejected. In the circumstances, the present Contempt Petition stands dismissed and disposed of summarily. (S.P. DAVARE, J.) fmp/cp172.09