JUDGMENT AND ORDER Manash Ranjan Pathak, J. Heard Mr. C. Lalramzauva, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. K. Laldinliana learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Vanlalnghaka, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.1 & 2. 2. The petitioners preferred a Writ Petition being WP(C) No. 51 of 2014 challenging the legality and validity of the decision of the respondents taken in the meeting held on 06.05.2014 with regard to non-renewal of the Booking Counter Agent's Licence for Maxi Cabs/Private Buses and Goods Booking Agency Licenses till further order and the public notice dated 27.5.2014 issued by the respondent No.2 for fresh Booking Counter Agent's Licence for issuance of tickets of passenger carrying Buses and Maxi Cabs and Goods Booking Agency Licences for Aizawl City informing that anyone who wants an Agents Licence shall submit duly filled form before 15.06.2014 to the State Transport Office at Chaltlang. The said petition has already been heard and presently awaits verdict. 3. The court on 12.06.2014 issued notice to the respondents to the said WP(C) No. 51/2014 &made it returnable by three weeks and in the interim suspended the above noted public notice dated 27.05.2014 till the next returnable date. In the meanwhile, the official respondents of said WP(C) No. 51/2014 submitted its affidavit in the matter. On 16.07.2014 when said WP(C) No. 51/2014 was listed for consideration, the petitioners took two weeks' time to file their reply to the affidavit of the State respondents, which was accordingly allowed by the Court and the said interim order dated 12.06.2014 was extended to the next returnable date. On 11.08.2014 the said matter was listed again for consideration and the Court issued rule, made it returnable by four weeks, directed to list the matter for hearing in the Part-II hearing list and further extended the interim order dated 16.07.2014 to the next returnable date. 4. After expiry of said four weeks' time, though said WP(C) No. 51/2014 was listed for more than one occasion, the petitioners' did not pray for extension of aforesaid interim order dated 16.07.2014. 5. 4. After expiry of said four weeks' time, though said WP(C) No. 51/2014 was listed for more than one occasion, the petitioners' did not pray for extension of aforesaid interim order dated 16.07.2014. 5. In the meanwhile, in the minutes of the meeting of the State Transport Authority held on 30.09.2014 at Serial No. 15 of the said minutes the authority concerned took decision with regards to the Application for fresh and renewal of Counter Agent's License containing the lists of (i) those who applied for fresh Counter Agent's License and (ii) those who applied for renewal of Counter Agent's License. The State Government in the Transport Department accordingly accorded its approval to the same and by its communication dated 07.11.2014 informed the Director of Transport Department about its said approved of the said minutes dated 30.09.2014. 6. The petitioners subsequently preferred a miscellaneous application being CM. Appl. No. 225 of 2014 in said WP(C) No. 51/2014 praying for continuation of the interim order dated 12.06.2014 passed earlier in said WP(C) No. 51/2014 and for stay of the said letter dated 07.11.2014 of the State Government in the Transport Department informing the Director of the Transport Department of the State about Government's approval to the minutes of the meeting of the State Transport Authority held on 30.09.2014 as well as for stay of the item at Serial No. 15 of the said minutes of the meeting dated 30.09.2014 of the State Transport Authority. 7. The petitioners in the said Misc. Application submitted that the Agents to whom fresh Counter Agent's Licenses have been issued, they have not yet started their said counters. 8. The Court after hearing the parties by its order dated 11.12.2014 passed in the said CM. Appl. No. 225/2014 extended the interim order dated 12.06.2014 passed earlier in the connected WP(C) No. 51/2014 till its final disposal and further stayed the approval of the Government informed vide communication dated 07.11.2014 with regard to the said Serial. No. 15 of the minutes of the meeting of the State Transport Authority held on 30.09.2014. 9. Petitioners contention in this petition is that in spite of the stay orders dated 11.12.2014 passed in said CM. Appl. No. 15 of the minutes of the meeting of the State Transport Authority held on 30.09.2014. 9. Petitioners contention in this petition is that in spite of the stay orders dated 11.12.2014 passed in said CM. Appl. No. 225/2014 the respondents have failed to take necessary steps as directed by this Court and illegally allowed the new Maxi Cab Counter Agent's License holders to operate their said counters and submitted that the respondents here in have wilfully & deliberately violated the said order dated 11.12.2014. 10. Both the respondents have filed their affidavits in the matter. The respondents submitted that the interim order staying the operation of the public notice dated 27.05.2014 was passed on 12.06.2014 in WP(C) No. 51/2014, which continued only up to 11.09.2014, till the same was extended by the Court on 11.12.2014 in said CM. Appl. No. 225/2014. The respondents have also submitted that on 11.12.2014 the Court further stayed the approval of the Government with regard to the Serial. No. 15 of the minutes of the meeting of the State Transport Authority held on 30.09.2014 that was communicated vide letter dated 07.11.2014. 11. The respondents also submitted that during the period from 11.09.2014 to 11.12.2014 there was no order from the Court staying/suspending the public notice in question dated 27.05.2014 preventing the respondents in issuing the order dated 07.11.2014. As such only in the event of non-extension of the interim order dated 12.06.2014, the respondents have issued the letter dated 07.11.2014 and in pursuance of the same, some new Agent's Licence were issued to the newly impleaded respondents in WP(C) No. 51/2014 who are operating their booking counters at their respective places of business. 12. The respondents further submitted that the nature of the order dated 11.12.2014 passed in CM. Appl. No. 225/2014 is only prohibitory in nature and contains no direction to the respondents to cancel or withdraw the licenses already granted to the newly impleaded respondents of WP(C) No. 51/2014 during the period from 11.09.2014 to 11.12.2014, when there was no prohibition for granting such licenses to them by any Court of law. 13. The respondents contention is that the order dated 11.12.2014 passed in said CM. Appl. 13. The respondents contention is that the order dated 11.12.2014 passed in said CM. Appl. No. 225/2014 is prospective in nature and while issuing the said order dated 11.12.2014, the Court did not stay the Counter Agent's Licenses already issued in favour of the new Agents, issued in absence of any stay order in force and/or in operation. The respondents also contended that if the Court wanted the order dated 11.12.2014 to have retrospective effect and had the Court by its order dated 11.12.2014 directed the respondents to cancel and/or withdraw all the actions taken by them during the period from 11.09.2014 to 11.12.2014, in absence of any stay order in force/operation, then they would have issued the order directing the same, since they have always taken care to uphold the dignity of the Courts. According to the respondents since there was no such direction by the Court in the said order dated 11.12.2014, they did not pass any such order withdrawing and/or cancelling the Counter Agent's Licenses already issued to the new Agents between 11.09.2014 to 11.12.2014 issued in the absence of any stay order from the Court. 14. Though allegation has been made that the respondents have disobeyed the order dated 11.12.2014 passed by the Court in CM. Appl. No. 225/2014 filed by the writ petitioners in their writ petition WP(C) No. 51/2014 but it goes to show that the Court by the said order dated 11.12.2014 extended the interim order dated 12.06.2014 passed earlier in the WP(C) No. 51/2014 suspending the public notice dated 27.05.2014 issued by the respondent No.2 calling for fresh Booking Counter Agent's Licence for issuance of tickets of passenger carrying Bus and Maxi Cab and Goods Booking Agency Licence for Aizawl City, till the final disposal of said WP(C) No. 51/2014. 15. By the said order dated 11.12.2014 passed in said CM. Appl. No. 225/2014 the Court also stayed the approval of the Government with regard to the Serial No. 15 of the minutes of the meeting of the State Transport Authority held on 30.09.2014 issued vide communication dated 07.11.2014. 16. For contempt of Courts with regard to the violation of an interim order of the Court in a writ preceding, it is to be seen whether the respondents have wilfully and/or deliberately violated the said interim order. 16. For contempt of Courts with regard to the violation of an interim order of the Court in a writ preceding, it is to be seen whether the respondents have wilfully and/or deliberately violated the said interim order. To punish the respondents under the contempt of Courts Act, mere violation of the order is not sufficient and such violation should be shown to be wilful and deliberate. When a direction is given to do a particular act, the authority concerned is bound to comply with the same even if it is an interim order. In the Serial No. 15 of the minutes of the meeting of the State Transport Authority held on 30.09.2014, the authorities considered the applications made by the applicants in pursuance to the public notice dated 27.05.2014 for fresh Booking Counter Agent's Licence for issuance of tickets of passenger carrying Buses & Maxi Cabs and Goods Booking Agency Licences for Aizawl City and the State Government in the Transport Department vide its communication dated 07.11.2014 informed the Director of Transport Department about the Government's approval of said minutes dated 30.09.2014. Accordingly, the respondents between 11.09.2014 to 11.12.2014 issued fresh Booking Counter Agent's Licences, when no stay order of Court staying and/or suspending the said public notice dated 27.05.2014 and Government's approval communicated on 07.11.2014 was in operation. Generally, all the orders of the Court are prospective in nature, unless it is specified in the order itself. In the present case the order dated 11.12.2014 does not indicate that it has been given retrospective effect. 17. For the reasons aforesaid, failure on the part of the respondents for taking necessary steps in withdrawing/cancelling/suspending the licenses of fresh Booking Counters given to the new Agents for issuance of tickets of passenger carrying Buses & Maxi Cabs and Goods Booking Agency Licences for Aizawl City granted by the respondents in the period from 11.09.2014 to 11.12.2014 during the absence of any stay order from Court, in terms of the interim order dated 11.12.2014, cannot be termed as intentional or deliberate. Further, the averments made by the respondents as to the facts of the case have not been denied by the petitioners. The respondents established their bona fide with regard to the compliance of the said order dated 11.12.2014 and no malice or disrespect to the Court have been found on the part of the respondents. 18. Further, the averments made by the respondents as to the facts of the case have not been denied by the petitioners. The respondents established their bona fide with regard to the compliance of the said order dated 11.12.2014 and no malice or disrespect to the Court have been found on the part of the respondents. 18. As alleged by the petitioners, with regard to the interim order dated 11.12.2014 the Court did not find any wilful or deliberate violation of the same by the respondents. 19. Accordingly, this contempt petition stands dismissed.