COPC 64 of 2011 13.10.2011 Present: Mr. Sanjay Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Shubh Mahajan, Deputy A.G. for respondent No. 4. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are present in person. This contempt petition has been preferred on the allegations that judgment passed by this Court on 29th April, 2010 has not been complied with. Earlier reply filed by the respondents was contentious and was taken to be an aggravation by this Court. The respondents have now filed fresh affidavit withdrawing previous affidavit stating that delay in obeying the judgment of this Court was basically for the reason that judgment of this Court was received late by the respondents. It is also stated by the learned Deputy Advocate General that demarcation has been carried out on 19th October, 2010. A submission has been made on behalf of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the demarcation is not in accordance with the Rules. This submission cannot be treated to constitute contempt as it is a matter for separate proceedings. This contempt petition is accordingly disposed of. It will be open to the petitioner to challenge the demarcation proceedings in case they are not conducted in accordance with law. Petition stands disposed of. 13th October, 2011 (Dev Darshan Sud), (ms) Judge