ORDER : K. Jayachandra Reddy, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 19(1)(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The first appellant was the Secretary, Labour, Social Welfare and Tribal Development Department, Government of Gujarat. The second appellant was the Director of Social Defence, Gujarat State, Ahmedabad. Both of them have been found guilty under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act by a Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court and each of them was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs 100. 2. The charge-sheet against them was that the appellants wilfully disobeyed the orders of the High Court. An opportunity was given to the appellants to enable the Government to carry out the necessary directions and the second appellant placed a compliance report before the High Court but the High Court took the view that the appellants have not shown any remorse or penitence for having earlier discarded (sic disobeyed) the judgment of the court in S.C.A. No. 806 of 1975. A notice of contempt was, however, given. Both the appellants tendered their apologies. The first appellant stated in his apology on behalf of the State Government and on his own behalf that they would see that no act or omission will ever recur thereafter. The appellant No. 2 filed an unconditional apology expressing profound sense of sorrow and that he acted in good faith. It is also further stated that the court is held in highest esteem; that the appellants would always obey orders or directions of the Honble Court as well as law declared by the Honble Court. The High Court also in the impugned order observed that there was some confusion in carrying out the directions and though that is a mitigating circumstance yet apology by itself does not purge the contempt. In that view of the matter, the High Court sentenced each of them to pay a fine of Rs 100 as stated above. This act of contempt is said to have taken place prior to 1979. We have perused the apologies tendered by both the appellants and we think the same can be accepted particularly in view of the observations of the High Court that there are mitigating circumstances. Accordingly the apologies tendered by the appellants are accepted and the punishment awarded is remitted. 3. The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated hereinabove. Appeal allowed.