1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Contempt Petition No. 205 of 2010 Jan Kalyan Sanstha, Armori Vs. Dr. V.M. Bhale and another. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. S.A. Kalbande, Adv. for the petitioner. Mr. A.R. Patil, Adv. for the respondents. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK J. DATE : 11 th November, 2011. By this petition, the petitioner seeks action against the respondents for willful disobedience of the direction issued by this court by the judgment dated 3.8.2009, directing the respondents to consider the application filed by the petitioner for starting an agricultural school at Thanegaon, dated 29.9.1999 in terms of the guidelines dated 8.8.2003 framed by the State Government, within a period of 12 weeks. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the Govt. Resolution dated 8.8.2003 and the affidavit-in- reply filed by the respondents, it is clear that the respondents were not in a position to decide the application filed by the petitioner on 29.9.1999, as under the Govt. Resolution dated 8.8.2003 the Maharashtra Agricultural Council had to prepare the perspective plan after taking into consideration the ability and the requirement of Agricultural Education, but the Council had failed to prepare the perspective plan. In the absence of the perspective plan, which needs to be approved by the Govt., the respondents have submitted that they are not in a position to grant the affiliation to the 2 petitioner and the application of the petitioner also cannot be effectively considered in this background. It is, in fact, stated in the affidavit that whenever the Council prepares the perspective plan and the Govt. of Mah. approves the same in future, the same would be advertised in newspaper and the petitioner's application would be considered along with the applications of the other persons in accordance with the guidelines prescribed in the perspective plan. It is rightly stated on behalf of the respondent that there is, therefore, no question of granting any affiliation to the Agricultural School of the petitioner in accordance with the guidelines in the Govt. Resolution dated 8.8.2003. In the instant case, it cannot be said that the respondents have disobeyed the directions issued by this court in the judgment dated 3.8.2009 in Writ Petition No. 116/2001. In the result, the contempt petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE Hirekhan.