( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 230 OF 2006 Balasaheb Yadavrao Nimbalkar .. Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and ors. .. Respondents Shri A.D. Shinde, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri D.V. Tele, A.G.P. for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Shri P.R. Patil, Advocate for respondent No.4. CORAM : P.R. BORKAR,J. DATED : 10.08.2009 P.C. :- 1. Heard Adv. Shri A.D. Shinde for the petitioner, A.G.P. Shri D.V. Tele for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Adv. Shri P.R. Patil for respondent No.4. The learned advocate for the petitioner drew my attention to the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court on 13.07.2006 in Writ Petition No. 4114 of 2006, in which following directions are given :- ( 2 ) “4. .................. However, we expect them to take all efforts by appealing the people from both communities to take appropriate steps and gave relief to the petitioner. We expect a joint report from the Collector, Superintendent of Police and Municipal Commissioner, Jalgaon, within five weeks.” 2. A.G.P.Shri Tele submitted that meeting was held and minutes are produced with reply affidavit filed by the Collector - respondent No.2 on 08.02.2007. My attention was also drawn by Adv. Shri P.R. Patil for respondent no.4 to the minutes of meeting produced at Exh. R-2 with reply affidavit filed by respondent No.4. The advocate for respondent No.4 states that these are the minutes of meeting held as per directions of the Court and he undertakes to produce said minutes with Civil Application in the original writ petition in compliance of the order. 3. In view of being satisfied with the undertaking given on behalf of respondent No.4, this Contempt Petition is disposed of. [P.R. BORKAR,J.] snk/2009/AUG09/cp230.06