The Body Of Members (Mazania) Shree Rudreshwar Devasthan, Thr. Its Duly Elected Att. And 4 ORS., v. R.K. Srivastava And 16 ORS.,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 9 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 628 OF 2016 THE BODY OF MEMBERS (MAZANIA) SHREE RUDRESHWAR DEVASTHAN, THR.

ITS DULY ELECTED ATT. AND 4 ORS., ... Petitioners

Versus

R.K. SRIVASTAVA AND 16 ORS., ... Respondents Mr. Preetam Talaulikar, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. D. Lawande, Advocate General with Mr. A. Pereira, Addl. Government Advocate for the Respondent nos. 1 and 2. Coram:- F. M. REIS & NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, JJ.

Date:- 24th April, 2017 P.C.

Heard Mr. P. Talaulikar, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners and Mr. D. Lawande, learned Advocate General appearing for the Respondent nos. 1 and 2.

2. This is a Contempt Petition filed on the ground that the Respondent no. 3 has disobeyed the directions issued by this Court whilst disposing of Writ Petition no. 628 of 2016 by Judgment dated 27.01.2017 specially the interim Orders which were ordered to be in operation.

3. By an Order dated 21.02.2017 in MCA no. 166 of 2017, this

CP/9/2017 Court had accepted the statement of the learned Addl. Government Advocate to the effect that there was mis-appreciation of the legal position by the said Respondent whilst taking an action complained of. Though the Respondent no. 3 is expected to properly comply with the directions of this Court as well as to understand the correct import of such Orders, any infraction thereto deserves to be severely deprecated and dealt with.

4. In such circumstances, as the error has been rectified, we find that no further action deserves to be taken in the above Contempt Petition.

5. Needless to say, the Respondent no. 3 is warned that no such lapses occur in future.

6. Contempt Petition stands disposed of accordingly. NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, J.

F. M. REIS, J.

arp/*