1 cp166.06 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 166 OF 2006 IN WRIT PETITION NO.4617 OF 2006 [M/s. Krushna Kumar Gokulchand through it's Partner Mr. Anilkumar Gokulchand Sharma vs. The State of Mah. & Ors. ] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders None appears for the petitioners. Mr. D.R. Kale, AGP for State/Respondents. CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J. DATE : 29TH AUGUST, 2011 PER COURT : This matter was listed for final hearing on 06-06-2011, however, on the said date none appeared for the petitioner. Therefore, the matter was adjourned to 17-06-2011. On 17-06-2011 adjournment was sought by the Counsel for the petitioner. Therefore, again the matter was adjourned to 24-06-2011. Again request was made on 06-07-2011. 2 cp166.06 2. Today, when this matter is called out, none appears for the petitioner. It appear that by efflux of time, the petitioner has lost interest in the contempt petition. 3. With the assistance of learned A.G.P. I proceed to decide the contempt petition finally. Once the notices are issued in the contempt proceedings, the matter necessarily becomes between the Court and the alleged contemnors. Role of the petitioner becomes merely informant and he is not a litigant as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Supreme Court Bar Association vs. Union of India and another reported in (1998) 4 S.C.C. 409. 4. Learned A.G.P. invited my attention to the order of the Division Bench of this Court of which disobedience/contempt is 3 cp166.06 alleged in this contempt petition. I have also perused the order dated 28-07-2006 at page 86 to 88 of the compilation. Para-3 of the said order reads thus : "By the present writ petition, petitioner has prayed for directions to the State to call for the tenders and go for allotment of contracts by regular process. The learned Senior Counsel Shri. Nafade assures on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 that the details as communicated to learned Senior Counsel will be followed strictly. In view of this assurance of the learned Senior Counsel on behalf of respondent NOS. 1 to 3 which we take on record as an undertaking, the purpose of the writ petition is served." 5. Learned A.G.P. invited my attention to the affidavit in reply filed respondent No.3 Mr. Namdeo Laxman Tadose, at the relevant time working as Deputy Secretary, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer 4 cp166.06 Protection Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32, on 21-09-2006 and in particular para-6 at page-113 and submitted that, the directions given by the Division Bench are complied with. Para-6 of the said affidavit in reply reads thus : "I say and submit that, as the assurance was given on behalf of Government that the tenders would be called for granting contract of transport of food grains etc., by following due process of inviting tenders etc., in order to consolidate the same uniformly all over State and providing the guidelines ands terms and conditions in that respect the Government issued the resolution dated 5.8.2006 by superseding the earlier Government resolutions to remove the ambiguity in that respect and accordingly the regular process for calling the tenders was initiated by the Government for the districts, as stated above, to comply the same within the aforesaid period mentioned before the Hon'ble High Court. I say 5 cp166.06 and submit that pursuant to the same process of calling the tenders is already in progress and in some of the district like Aurangabad tenders have been also allotted and in other cases the same is being under scrutiny and after that the appropriate decision would be taken considering all pros and cons and accordingly, the department is trying to take appropriate decision as early as possible." 6. Learned A.G.P. further submits that, not only the directions of the Division Bench are complied with but the said tender process was over for the year 2006 to 2009. 7. In the light of above, in my opinion, nothing further survives for consideration in this contempt petition and same stands disposed of. Notice stands discharged. [S.S. SHINDE, J.] sut/AUG11 6 cp166.06