1 905 CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 9 OF 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 905 CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 9 OF 2009 IN WP/4855/2003 VINAYAK NANAJI KENDRE VERSUS THE CIDCO BOMBAY AND ORS ... None for the petitioner Adv. U. S. Bhosale, AGP for Respondents-State ... CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE AND VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ. DATED : 22/09/2026 Order (Per Vaishali Patil-Jadhav, J. ) . None for the petitioner. 2. In the order under contempt, the directions were given to the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 to decide the complaint dated 24.12.2001 filed by the petitioner, on or before 30.06.2004. 3. The notices in the contempt petition were issued in the year 2009 and the contempt petition has not been circulated after 2013. With the passage of time, it is presumed that the order under contempt must have been complied by deciding the complaint. 4. In view of the same, nothing survives in the contempt petition and the same stands disposed of. ( VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, J. ) ( SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J. ) shivani/ 2026:BHC-AUG:43381