1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CONTEMPT PETITION NO.90 OF 2010 in WRIT PETITION NO.5440/2008 Smt. Narasamma Hiraiyya Shaikshanik Trust & another versus J.S.Sahariya and others - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri S.P.Deshpande, advocate for petitioner Shri Anand Deshpande AGP for respondents CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : May 06, 2010 . The matter was listed before this court on 29.4.2010, this court did not issue a formal notice to the respondents, but asked Shri A.M. Deshpande, the learned A.G.P. to take instructions in the matter as the Division Bench of this court had by order dated 4.5.2009 in Writ Petition No.5440/2008 merely observed that court expected that the the respondents would take a decision in the matter as early as possible. It appears that the petitioner had moved the Division Bench of this court in Writ Petition No.5440/2008 for a direction to the respondent to admit the Computer Science Subject in the Science Faculty from a particular academic session and also admit the same to grant in aid facility and release the grand in aid facility to the petitioner. The Division Bench of this court by order dated 4.5.2009 disposed of the writ petition in view of the affidavit filed by the Joint Director of Higher Education wherein it was stated that the proposal of the petitioners was not decided because of the imposition of the Code of Conduct by the Election Commission. The Deputy Director of Higher Education had stated in the affidavit that the issue about extending the 2 grand in aid to the Computer Science Course would be placed before the Cabinet / Competent Authority for necessary consideration. In view of statement made in the affidavit, the High Court disposed of the writ petition with an expectation that the state government would decide the issue as early as possible. It is informed to this court by the learned AGP on the basis of communication issued by the Section Officer, State Government dated 6.5.2010 that the issue about the extending grant in aid facility to Computer Science Course would be decided after considering the number of the institutions conducting the said course and the financial burden that would be suffered by the State in view of the extension of grant in aid facility. The learned AGP on the basis of the communication dated 6.5.2010, which is placed on record states that the collection of the data would take some time, but the respondent would endeavour to consider the case of the petitioner as soon as the data is received and a decision in regard to the extension of grant in aid facility is taken in cabinet. The learned AGP states that he is informed by the Director of Higher Education that the steps would be taken to complete the process as early as possible. Since this court had by order dated 4.5.2009 in Writ Petition No.5440/2008 not directed the respondent to take a decision within a stipulated period, after considering the submissions of the learned AGP, it can not be said that the respondents have willfully and deliberately flouted the order of this court and that it is necessary to initiate action against the respondents under the Contempt of Courts Act 1971. In the result, the contempt petition is disposed of with no orders as to costs. JUDGE smp