IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 85 OF 2006 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 1430 OF 2005 Seema T. Shetty ... Petitioner Vs. Union of India & Ors. ... Respondents Mr. D.Thakare i/b. Kinjal Haria for the petitioner None for Resondents. CORAM: S.K.SHAH,J. CORAM: S.K.SHAH,J. CORAM: S.K.SHAH,J. DATE : 13th October, 2006. DATE : 13th October, 2006. DATE : 13th October, 2006. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. As per the order dated 21.4.2005 in the Writ Petition, it was directed that the petitioner should not be terminated from service. A grievance is made that the services of the petitioner were terminated. 2. However, perusal of the order indicates that the directions were to go into the grievance of the petitioner and for that purpose, the Court had directed to appoint a Committee and take decision. The said Committere has gone into the complaints made by the petitioner and decisiion has been taken. It is obvious that the direction not to terminate the petitioner’s services was in terms of the order i.e. till the decision is taken. Now, the decision is taken. Therefore, the order has been complied with. 3. There is no substance in the Contempt Petition. The Contempt Petition is disposed of. --- (S.K.SHAH,J.) (S.K.SHAH,J.) (S.K.SHAH,J.)