1 CA No.10382/2009 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD 1. CA/10382/2009 [Civil] In CP/167/2008 (Ravindra Vs. The Commissioner) -------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Court’s or Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Judge’s or directions and Registrar’s orders Orders ... CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE:10-12-2010 1. Heard. Contempt Petition is dismissed on 22.7.2009. The grievance of the petitioner is, on 10.7.2008, this Court prima facie found that there is contempt of the order dt. 28.1.2008 passed by the Divisional Social Welfare Officer, Latur, in Appeal No. 5/2006. Consequent thereupon, notices were issued. On 22.7.2009, when the matter was called, the colleague of the Counsel was informed to attend it. However, there was communication gap and the matter went in dismissal. 2 CA No.10382/2009 2. Incidentally, I have heard what is the main grievance in the Contempt Petition. The survey illustrates, prima facie, there is good case even in the contempt. The delay is sufficiently explained. Application allowed. In the contempt, no further notices to the respective parties. Reply, if any, to be filed in the intervening period. Petition would be heard finally on 18th Jan.,2011. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE ... AGP/10382-09ca 3 CA No.10382/2009