cp233.10 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 233 OF 2010 Dattatraya s/o Marotirao Ghodke .. PETITIONER VERSUS Shri Sachindra Pratap Sinh & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. R.D. Biradar, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. V.B. Ghatge, AGP for respondents. ===== CORAM : R.M. BORDE, J. DATE : 9 th MARCH, 2011. PER COURT : 1 Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, on instructions, seeks leave to delete name of respondent no. 3. Leave granted. Name of respondent no.3 stands deleted. 2 This court, while disposing of Writ Petition no. 4350/2009, vide order dated 12-1-2010, directed the respondents to consider the representations filed by petitioner. It was also further directed that consideration of the representation shall be done expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months from the date of passing of the order. cp233.10 2 3 Respondent no. 2 – Education Officer (Primary), Zilla Parishad, Latur has filed affidavit in reply and it is stated in the affidavit that in pursuance of the directions issued by this court, the representation tendered by the petitioner was taken up for consideration. Petitioner was issued notice to appear before the Education Officer on 6-4-2010 and accordingly, petitioner caused his appearance. The Education Officer, also constituted a committee of three members to enquire into the allegations levelled by the petitioner. The Committee investigated the matter and submitted its report to the Education Officer. Thus, there is substantial compliance of the directions issued by this court. Petitioner, although has participated in the enquiry proceeding, has not disclosed in his contempt application that he appeared before the Education Officer and participated in the enquiry proceeding. The petitioner has suppressed material facts from the court. Petition, therefore, does not deserve any consideration and the same stands rejected. ( R. M. BORDE ) JUDGE dyb