1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD Contempt Petition No.125 of 2009 Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders 1. Heard Shri N.G. Kale, Advocate for the petitioner and Shri S.P. Daund, AGP, for Respondents No.1 to 3. 2. This contempt petition is filed for not considering representation filed by the petitioner with Respondent No. 4 Shri Lahu Dure-the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Latur. 3. It is further stated that after the order passed on 31.3.2008 of this Court, petitioner approached Respondent No. 4 on 25.4.2008. Thereafter, on 9.5.2008 Respondent No. 4 called upon Head Master (Respondent No.6) and the petitioner and directed the petitioner 2 to remain present along with his son, in his office on 21.5.2008. Accordingly, on 21.5.2008 the petitioner along with his son had been to the office of Respondent No. 4 but Respondent No.4 was busy in other work and, therefore, he directed his subordinate to study the matter. No reply was given till 3.3.2009. 4. Along with affidavit in reply, necessary orders passed on 29.4.2009 have been produced by learned A.G.P. 5. It is argued by Advocate Shri Kale that the order is passed after notice of this contempt petition was given to Respondent No.4. Learned A.G.P. drew my attention to paragraph 6 of the affidavit in reply which states that the delay was caused due to suspension of Respondent No.4- Education officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Latur. If Respondent No.4 himself was under suspension, that is a proper reason why he could not process representation of the petitioner within time. 3 6. Being satisfied with the reason for delay in passing necessary order, this contempt petition is disposed of. Date:22/07/2009 (P.R.BORKAR, J.) pnd/cp125.09