* 1 * C.P. 476.2010 27.10.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 476 OF 2010 Sou. Kanta Dhananjayrao Gadekar .... Petitioner V/S. Shri. B.B. Ekshinge, Principal B.P. Sulakhe Commerce College Barsi District, Solapur & Ors. .........Respondents * * * * * * Mr. S.G. Kudle, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. A.I. Patel, AGP for the State-respondents. Coram : Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J. 27 October, 2010. P.C. : 1. This contempt petition is filed alleging that the respondents have wilfully disobeyed the directions contained in the order dated 17.08.2010 passed by the Division Bench of this * 2 * C.P. 476.2010 27.10.2010 Court in Writ Petition No. 3597 of 2009. The relevant directions read as follows :- . Respondent no.2 is directed to submit a fresh proposal to “ the respondent no.4 for seeking approval to the appointment of the petitioner on a regular basis. If such a proposal is submitted by the respondent no.2 within a period of two weeks from date, the respondent no.4 or the concerned authorities would decide the same within a period of two weeks thereafter, without being swayed by the stand taken by the concerned respondents in their respective affidavits in the above petition. The authorities would be well advised to take into consideration the fact that the petitioner has been working uninterruptedly since the last 18 years on a clock- hour basis.” 2. At Exhibit-F to the contempt petition, the petitioner has annexed the order dated 13.09.2010 passed by the District Vocational Training Officer, Solapur who is respondent no.4 to Writ Petition No.3597 of 2009 rejecting the proposal of the petitioner on four grounds stated therein. The order has been passed within the time granted and as such there is no violation * 3 * C.P. 476.2010 27.10.2010 of the order. 3. Mr. Kudle, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, the respondents have deliberately rejected the proposal of the petitioner because they wanted to support the illegal decision dated 01.01.2009 taken by respondent no.4 to the present petition who was respondent no.6 to the Writ Petition No. 3597 of 2009 in appointing another lady teacher by name Smt. Malal Ratnaprabha Indrajit who had joined the services much after the petitioner. The appointment of Smt. Malal was made more than a year prior to the orders sought to be implemented by the present petitioner. There was no grievance raised as regards her appointment in earlier petition. The contention has not also been specifically taken up in the contempt petition. In the circumstance, the contention raised cannot be considered in the present contempt petition. Hence, the contempt petition is dismissed. [Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J]