1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 51 OF 2006 Shri. Sitram Ahilaji Hiwale ....Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra & others ....Respondents. Shri. S.R. Palnitkar, Advocate for the petitioner - Absent. Shri. S.K.Kadam, AGP for the respondent No. 1. CORAM : R.K. DESHPANDE, J. DATE : 2nd December, 2009 PER COURT : 1. Notice in this contempt petition was issued on 17.3.2006. When the matter is called out today, none appears for the petitioner. The matter is of 2006 and therefore, this Court proceeds to decide the matter. 2. With the assistant of learned A.G.P. Shri. Kadam, I have gone through the order dated 22.4.1999, passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 467/1999. It was directed that if the inquiry against the petitioner is not completed on 30.6.1999, then the sealed cover is directed to be 2 opened and if the petitioner is found fit for promotion, the recommendation is to be implemented. 3. An affidavit dated 20.4.2006 has been filed in reply to the contempt petition, which is sworn in by the Director of Accounts and Treasuries, Maharashtra State, Mumbai. Paras 8 and 9 of the said affidavit, which are relevant, are reproduced below :- "8. I respectfully say and submit that, this Hon'ble High Court disposed of the Writ Petition No. 467/1999 on 22/4/1999 with directions to this deponent for complying the said order. The deponent's office made sincere efforts since it was not possible to complete the departmental enquiry of the petitioner before 30/6/99. The Government decided to give promotion to the petitioner on the post of Deputy Director in pursuance of the order passed by this Hon'ble High Court and accordingly, orders were issued on 21/7/1999, the same is annexed by the petitioner as Exhibit-B to the contempt petition. This fact is not at all disputed thus the order passed by this Hon'ble High Court is implemented in letter and spirit. 9. I further say and submit that, since there were no directions by this Hon'ble High Court in the matter of fixing seniority, the seniority was not fixed since it is settled principle that the seniority should be fixed only after conclusion of departmental enquiry. Thus, further I say and submit that, the order passed by this Hon'ble High Court on 22/4/1999 is implemented fully in letter and spirit." The Secretary, (Accounts and Treasuries) Finance Department, Maharashtra State, Mumbai has also filed an affidavit dated 20th April 2006 making the similar statements in para 8 of affidavit. 3 4. In view of the aforesaid statement appearing in the affidavit, I am satisfied that the order has been fully complied with. The petition appears to have made some grievances about the other benefits of seniority, not being made available to him. However, there are no such directions of this Court, which can be said to have been flouted. In view of this, I do not find any substance in the present petition. The same is, therefore, dismissed. [ R.K. DESHPANDE, J. ] ssc/cp51.06