1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 116 OF 2008 ( Priyadarshani Mahila Bahu-uddeshiya Sahakari Pat. Sanstha & Ors. vs. Asstt. Registrar & Anr.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. AUGUST 26, 2008. Heard Shri Muley, Advocate for the petitioners and Shri Ahirkar, AGP for the respondents. Seen affidavit filed by AGP. There is delay of about 15 days in holding elections. The order dated 24.3.2008 itself has been communicated to the Officer on 5.4.2008 i.e. after about 10 days. The statement made by the said officer on affidavit that the petitioner herself did not submit records and caused delay in handing over the record, is not borne out of the Court and it is incorrect and false. However, as the elections have been held, I find that it is not necessary for this Court to delve more into the controversy. Shri Muley, Advocate for the petitioners points out that some of the petitioners have not been served with the notice. It implies that some petitioners received notice. If the election is illegal 2 or improper, the petitioners have got remedy to challenge it before the appropriate forum. Though, there is no reason put forth on record to explain the delay in present matter, I am not inclined to take any action. Contempt Petition is, therefore, disposed of. JUDGE *GS.