JUDGMENT : KAUSHAL JAYENDRA THAKER, J. 1. None present for the petitioner. 2. It is stated at the Bar by Sri. Anil Kumar Pandey, learned Counsel for the State, that the orders are already complied with. 3. In that view of the matter, the contempt application stands disposed of. FURTHER ORDER: 4. After the aforesaid order is passed, Sri. Anil Kumar for the applicant appears and states that the respondent has over reached the order of this Court. It is true that he has shown that he has in fact complied with the order but very nicely-instead of Zahida, the authority has written Zaheda. Whatever the dispute is, her name has now to be read as Zahida Parveen whether it is Zaheda Parveen W/o Muqtar Ahmad D/o Abdul Guffar, which was earlier mentioned as Zaheen, therefore, the authority concerned shall write her name in English as “Zahida Parveen” as per Affidavit of the petitioner. 5. The respondent shall make the said correction within 4 weeks from today and, therefore, on the statement made by Sri. Anil Kumar Pandey this petition stands disposed of. 6. Accordingly, the contempt petition is disposed of with liberty to revive in case of difficulty.