{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO.316 OF 2008 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1056 OF 2006 Deorao s/o Wamanrao Kadam Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra & others Respondents Mr.S.S.Rathi, advocate for the petitioner. Mr.V.B.Ghadge, A.G.P. for respondents. CORAM : R.M.BORDE, J. DATE : 10 th March, 2011 PER COURT: 1 This Court, after extending an opportunity of hearing to both the sides, has dealt with the matter on merits and for the reasons recorded in the order passed on 03.03.2011, recorded a finding that Respondent No.2 is guilty of committing breach of the order passed by this Court. This Court also recorded a finding that Respondent No.3 has not violated the orders passed by this Court and as such, he has been exonerated. 2 The learned A.G.P. extended a request to the Court to adopt a sympathetic approach in the matter. It was assured by the learned A.G.P. that Respondent No.2 will file an affidavit and would tender an unconditional apology for not implementing the orders {2} passed by this Court, between the period 6th May 2008 till 13th January 2009 and thereafter between 14th January 2009 till her transfer on 5th July 2009. My learned Brother, who dealt with the matter, has observed in the order that, on receipt of the affidavit, the matter would be taken up for consideration and it would be decided as to what action should be taken, as contemplated by Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act. 3 Respondent No.2 has placed on record affidavit sworn on 08.03.2011. Respondent No.2 has tendered unconditional apology on account of her failure to implement the orders, passed by this Court, between 06.04.2008 to 13.01.2009 and thereafter from 14.01.2009 till 05.07.2009. The concerned respondent has unequivocally and in clear terms tendered written apology for the lapses committed by her. 4 It also transpires on perusal of the record that the dispute pertaining to holding of elections was carried up to the Apex Court and the matter remained pending for some time. In all probabilities, the concerned official failed to take prompt action because of pendency of litigation before the Apex Court. In these circumstances, I am of the view that the unconditional apology tendered by Respondent No.2 shall be accepted. My learned Predecessor, while passing speaking order on 03.03.2011, has recorded a finding that Respondent No.2 is guilty of committing {3} breach of the orders passed by this Court. The finding of guilt is already recorded, however, so far as imposition of punishment is concerned, considering the facts and circumstances of this case and considering that the Respondent No.2 has tendered unconditional apology for her inaction, I do not deem it appropriate to direct imposition of any separate sentence. The written unconditional apology tendered by Respondent No.2 is accepted. 5 The Contempt Petition stands disposed of. R.M.BORDE JUDGE adb/cp316.08