1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.61 OF 2009 IN CONTEMPT PETITION NO.71 OF 2008 IN WRIT PETITION NO.780 OF 2007 Dilip Dattaram Agre .. Petitioner Versus Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai .. Respondent Mr.A.B.Tajne for petitioner Ms.T.H.Purohit for B.M.C. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 23rd March 2009. P.C. . Heard Mr.Tajne for petitioners and Ms.Puranik for B.M.C. Notice of motion is moved in a disposed of contempt petition. 2. The contempt petition came to be disposed of on 17th November 2008 with a direction that if the petitioner makes a fresh representation, the 2 same should be considered and disposed of within six weeks from the date of receipt thereof by the respondents. 3. In the affidavit filed in reply, it is pointed out that the representation was considered and disposed of on 22nd December 2008. 4. The remedy of petitioner is not to proceed with this notice of motion but to challenge the order passed on the fresh representation by instituting appropriate proceedings wherein merits of the order can be looked into. These are not the proceedings where such a course is permissible more so, when the contempt petition is also disposed of. 5. In the light of the same, notice of motion is disposed of with liberty to petitioner to adopt appropriate proceedings. No costs. 3 (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J)