Contempt proceedings are dropped after the parties confirm compliance with the writ order.

The petitioners instituted contempt proceedings alleging non-compliance with an order of the Writ Court. At the hearing, counsel for both the petitioners and the State jointly submitted that the Writ Court’s order had been complied with.

Whether the Writ Court’s order had been complied with, such that the contempt proceeding could be dropped.

Whether the contempt petition should therefore be disposed of.

The judgment cites no statute, precedent, or specific contempt-law doctrine.

It proceeds on the basis that, once the parties jointly submitted that the underlying Writ Court order had been complied with, the contempt proceeding could be dropped.

The Court relied on the joint submission of counsel for both sides that the Writ Court’s order had been complied with.

In light of that submission, it considered no further contempt proceeding necessary and dropped the matter.