1 906 CONT. PETITION NO. 158 OF 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 906 CONT. PETITION NO. 158 OF 2013 IN WP/8457/2011 DATTATRAYA PANDHARINATH CHOLE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ….. Adv. Vanita H. Sangole, Advocate for the Petitioner Adv. S. J. Salgare, AGP for Respondents-State ….. CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE AND VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ. DATED : 27/08/2026 Per Court: . By way of an order under contempt dated 16.02.2012 passed in the writ petition, respondent No.2 was directed to decide the proposal filed by the petitioner. By way of an affidavit, respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in this contempt petition have stated that, if the proposal is filed by the petitioner along with the required documents, it will be considered. This affidavit is filed in the year 2013. By this time, the application must have been considered by respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 as stated in their affidavit in reply. 2. In view of the same, nothing survives in this contempt petition and the petition stands disposed of. ( VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, J. ) ( SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J. ) shivani/ 2026:BHC-AUG:39021