1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 179/2007 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2633/1998 (Yavatmal District Semi Derosene Dealers Assn. & ors. Vs. The State of Mah. & ors.) Appeal District : Application No. of 200 Writ petition Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. CORAM : Smt. Vasanti A. Naik, J. DATED : 17 th APRIL, 2008. Heard Shri S.R. Deshpande for the petitioners and Mrs. Dangre, the learned Additional Government Pleader, for the respondents. According to the petitioners, the respondents have deliberately disobeyed the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court on 28/8/1998. By the order dated 28/8/1998, the Division Bench had granted Rule in Writ Petition No. 2633/1998 filed by the petitioners and also granted ad interim order in terms of prayer clause (c). It appears that by the prayer clause (c), the petitioner had sought the stay of the implementation of the order at Anenxure-A to the said petition, pending decision. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that in spite of the order dated 28/8/1998, the Tahsildar Kelapur, issued a 2 communication to the Collector, Yavatmal on 1/7/2007, seeking approval to the proposal of delivering kerosene at the doorsteps of dealers. According to the petitioners, the respondents have utterly violated the orders passed by the Division Bench on 28/8/1998 by issuing the said communication dated 1/7/2007 and an action should be taken against them under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts act. Mrs. Dangre, the learned Additional Government Pleader, submitted that the Government Circular at Annexure-A to the Writ Petition No. 2633/1998 was the subject matter of challenge before the two benches of the Bombay High Court. It is further submitted on behalf of the respondents that all the writ petitions challenging the Government Circular which was annexed at Annexure-A to the Writ Petition No. 2633/1998, were heard together by the Division Bench of the High Court,Bench at Aurangabad and were disposed of by a judgment dated 30/9/1998. The Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court vacated the interim order passed in several writ petitions and allowed the Government to implement the scheme for supply of kerosene to the dealers at their doorsteps to 50% of the villages. It is submitted that in pursuance of the order passed by the Division 3 Bench at Aurangabad, the Government had framed a Scheme on 28/6/2004 and the policy of the Government had been revised. According to the respondents, inadvertently, the writ petition filed by the petitioners remained to be transferred to Aurangabad Bench along with the group of other petitions which were transferred to the Bench at Aurangabad. It is also submitted on behalf of the respondents that after the decision in the bunch of writ petitions on 30/9/1998, since no cause action survived in Writ Petition No. 2633/1998, the respondents moved an application for dismissal of the writ petition. The Division Bench of this Court has, by an order dated 20/2/2008, dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner as infructuous. In the backdrop of the aforesaid facts, it is submitted on behalf of the respondents that it cannot be said that the respondents had deliberately and intentionally flouted the orders passed by the Division Bench of this Court on 28/8/1998 in Writ Petition No. 2633/1998. Since the respondents became aware of the pendency of the Writ Petition No. 2633/1998 which remained to be transferred to Aurangabad Bench, the necessary orders for dismissal of the writ petition were sought from the Division Bench of the Court. Though it appears from the submissions 4 made on behalf of the respective parties that the stay granted by the Division Bench of this Court on 28th August, 1998 was operational when the revised policy was framed, it is clear from the record that the action for reframing or revising the policy was taken by the Government in pursuance of the order passed by the Aurangabad Bench of this Court. It appears that since only Writ Petition No. 2633/1998 remained to be transferred to Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court, the respondents were oblivious of the fact of the pendency of writ petition before this Bench and the existence of the interim order passed therein. In the backdrop of the aforesaid facts, it cannot be said that the respondents had intentionally or deliberately disobeyed the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 2633/1998. For the aforesaid reasons, the contempt proceedings are dropped. Contempt petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE RMP