1 C.P.339.09 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO.339 OF 2009 Balu S/o Bhagwan Muley R/o Beed. ...PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and others. ...RESPONDENTS ... Mr.P.P.Shahane,Advocate for Petitioner. Mr.D.V.Tele,AGP for Respondent ... CORAM: S.S. SHINDE, J. DATE : 9TH AUGUST, 2011 PER COURT : 1. In the light of averments made in para No.3 of additional affidavit filed by the Secretary Public Works Department, Government of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Mumbai that the Award of the Labour Court has been complied with and to the effect G.R. bearing Outward No. Sankirna/2009/Pra/ Kra. 293 Seva, 5 Mantralaya, Mumbai 32, dated 2 C.P.339.09 08.08.2011 is issued, the present Contempt Petition can be disposed of. 2. It is true that the Award of Labour Court which is confirmed by this Court and subsequently by the Supreme Court was not complied within reasonable period. However, in the light of averments made in affidavit and additional affidavit in reply filed by respondent, in my opinion, the Award of the Labour Court has been complied with and there is no willful disobedience of the order as such. 3. The Supreme Court in the case of Suresh Chandra Poddar Vs. Dhani Ram and others, reported in (2000)1 SCC 766 held that ‘even where the order of Court is complied with, subsequent to receipt of notice of contempt, Court should show judicial grace and magnanimity in dealing with action for contempt.’ 4. In the light of aforesaid discussion, nothing 3 C.P.339.09 further survives for consideration in this contempt petition. The Contempt Petition is disposed of. Notice stands discharged. Sd/- [S.S. SHINDE, J.] MTK