IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.83 OF 2006 IN WRIT PETITION NO.2157 OF 2005 Ms.Suchita Appasaheb Soundatte & Anr...Petitioners Versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents ...... Mrs.Prabhu i/b Mr.N.V.Bandiwadekar for Petitioners. 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. MARCH 14, 2006. MARCH 14, 2006. MARCH 14, 2006. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Learned A.G.P. has rightly invited my attention to the reasoned order passed by the Authority on 31st May 2005 in terms of the directions contained in order dated 8th April 2005. Viewed thus, no case for initiating contempt action is made out. : 2 : 2. Counsel for the Petitioners, however, contends that the Application preferred by the Petitioners has not been considered separately. This submission clearly overlooks the fact that the claim of the Petitioners has been considered in the reasoned order. The name of the Petitioner No.1 appears at Serial No.6 and of Petitioner No.2 at Serial No.11. Hence, rejected. Notices issued to Respondents stand discharged. A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.