1 (CAN 12 of 2011 in CP 314 of 2010) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12 OF 2011 IN CONTEMPT PETITION NO.314 OF 2010 Bhimgonda Appaji Patil ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents ----- Mr.Prashant Bhavake i/b. Mr. Narendra Bandiwadekar for Applicant Mr.S.N. Bhosale -AGP for Respondent No.1 ----- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED: 4TH FEBRUARY, 2011 P.C. 1. Mentioned not on Board. 2. An application is made for modification of the order passed in Contempt Petition. It is also stated that liberty may be granted to the Applicant to adopt appropriate remedy for modification of the order passed by the Respondent No.2. 3. In my view, no case is made for modification of the review of the order. 3. Perusal of the order indicates that only modification which can be made regarding the date of the order passed by this Court. In paragraphs 2 and 3, the 2 (CAN 12 of 2011 in CP 314 of 2010) date is wrongly mentioned as 27th March, 2010 instead of 27th January, 2010. The order is, accordingly, modified. 4. The submissions of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant that since final orders are not passed by the Education Officer pursuant to the directions given by this Court and, therefore, contempt is committed cannot be accepted. This application has already been rejected by this Court in the impugned order. Hence, it is not possible to recall the said order. 5. Needless to mention that the Applicant always has a right to ensure that the Education Officer promptly passes the order as per the direction by taking out appropriate proceedings. The Education Officer therefore, is directed to expeditiously disposed of the matter which is referred in the order. 6. Application is disposed of. (V.M. KANADE J.)