1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 220 OF 1996 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 3180 OF 1995 AND WRIT PETITION NO. 431 OF 1996 WITH CIVIL APPLICAITON NO. 4669 OF 1997 IN CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 220 OF 1996 Sharda Vidya Prasarak Mandal ...Petitioner Versus Suryabhan Hiraman Patil and others ...Respondents ..... Mr. Suresh Kulkarni, advocate for the petitioner Mr. D.R. Korde, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.4 to 6 ..... CORAM: S. S. SHINDE, J. DATED: 15TH SEPTEMBER, 2010 PER COURT:- 1 This contempt petition is filed with a grievance that the respondents have not complied with the order passed by the learned Division Bench of this Court in writ petition Nos. 3180 of 1995 and 431 of 1996. It is stated in the petition that though learned Division Bench of this Court has directed the respondents to close down the respondent No.3 school, no steps were taken by the respondents. It is further submitted that the said directions were issued on the backdrop that said school was not recognized. 2 2 This contempt petition was heard by this Court for admission on 7.8.1997 when Rule was issued and the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 were directed to take steps to close down the respondent No.3 school. 3 Counsel for the petitioner fairly states that after filing this contempt petition, respondent No.3 school obtained permission/recognition from the State Government. The said action of the State Government in granting recognition to the respondent No.3 school, was challenged by the petitioner. However, the said challenge failed. 4 Taking into consideration the events, which took place after filing this contempt petition and in view of the fact that the recognition is granted to respondent No.3 school and the challenge for granting recognition to the respondent No.3 school by the present petitioner is failed, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping this contempt petition pending. In my opinion, no further adjudication of this contempt petition is necessary in the light of what is stated herein above. In this view of the matter, Contempt petition is dismissed. Rule discharged. 5 In view of dismissal of contempt petition, nothing remains to be decided in the civil application and thus civil application No. 4669 of 1997 stands dismissed as infructuous. ( S. S. SHINDE. J.) rlj/ 3