1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 160/2009 Ajay Machhindra Ghorpade ...Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents. ... Shri B.V. Thombare, advocate for petitioner. Shri S. K. Kadam, A.G.P. for respondent nos. 2 to 5. .... CORAM : R.K. Deshpande, J Date : 11-11-2009 PER COURT : 1. The Division Bench of this Court by an order dated 04-02-2009 directed State Government to decide representations dated 12-05-2008 and 07-06-2008 made by the petitioner regarding his appointment on the post of Secondary Shikshan Sevak during period of eight weeks from the date of the order. Since it was not decided within stipulated period or that the decision taken was not communicated to the petitioner, the instant petition has been filed. It is urged that there is willful default on the part of respondent. Shri Kadam learned A.G.P. stated that, affidavit has been filed by respondent no. 1 Secretary, respondent no.4 Additional Commissioner, as well as other respondents, in 2 response to the contempt petition. He has brought to my notice that, on 26-03-2009 representation has been decided and copy of the said decision has been tendered to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Shri Thombare learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, states that he has received copy of communication just now and sought time of two weeks to verify contents. He further states that, the representation has not been decided within stipulated period. Hence, it is clear case of contempt. 2. After going through affidavit filed by the respondents and decision which is placed on record dated 26-03-2009, I am satisfied that the order of this court dated 04-02-2009 passed in Writ Petition No. 6081/2008 has been complied with and there is no case for taking cognizance of the contempt. The contempt proceedings are dropped. 3. The contempt petition is dismissed. (R.K. DESHPANDE, J) tsk/cp160.09