'-HC—78 311^1 W K-(\* 'iWI 311^1 *t|i* 'f-;'," WHWI (h*11<!h TnET •^i<iid<i, ynl'H'Ko, fs«ni'ylj,< ^...Cwt:£et..d^ •W^200 7 sn^r T R ('^f3^ti) TOIIW ^itei sn^ii PETn-IONER: [pr. P.C. Gupte, S/o Late Shri P.L. (pupta, aged about 67 years, Retired /|isstt. Surgeon, Wo Doctors Colony, ^ehind CIMS, Saraswati Nagar, New Ffratap Talkies, Bllaspur, Distt. Bilaspur ;.G.) (I RESPONDENTS: {Contempt petition under Art. 12ofthe Sinale Bench: Hon 10-7-2008 Mr. Rajeev Shrivastava petitioner. Mr. Utkarsh Verma, couns^l for the respondents. Heard. Mr. Uttersh Vermasubmitsl 21st March, 2007, a repr^ent8|tion secretary ana inat represenrauon <+>l^<rf4l'H 'qTOpTf ^f 'fe^' <Hfl<-$i< ^? affipT sn^l Versus - 1. Ff. Ramesh Kumar, Secretary, qiepartment of Public Health and Family ^Velfare, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantrateya, l^aipur (C.G.) 2. E|tr- Promod Singh, Dlrector, l-1ea)th }ervices, D.K.S. Bhawan, Martralaya, F?aipur (C.G.) 3. Qr. R.R. Thwari, Chief Medical OfTicer, 4meri Road, Nehru Nagar, BUaspur, Etistt. Bilaspur(C.G.) Wstt. 21$ oftheConstituUonoflndia read with Sec. Contejmpt of CourtsAct, 1973} bte Mr, Justt L.C. Bhadoo Bi Mr. Indrasen Sahu, counsel for the that in pursuance of the Court order dated was made by the petitioner to ttie was disposea c^ wnti a airecaion fhat iri —78 s^v ^ii R-ti'* 'WH 3H^T sti^ict) -~^t ^ 'A Soma 'S'Sf ^WW^ ($Tlly'|<o, fqcll'M'J.i ^^^^^^.I&l^.^, ^ STI^F TWIi' ('i^f'l^'i^) ?^<nw +if^a <tii^<i view of SectlonSS ofthe M.P.I had already retlred fn the ye^i therefore, he has to make a Pradesh. Consequerrtly, the p^l of Madhya Pradesh, that wa^ petitioner has again filed a State of Madhya Pradesh. Advocate, present in the Court writ petition challenging the decif tn vlew oftheabove,! an|i contempt petition, asthe pursuance of the Court orcter. disposedof. writ betftion 'nhis grfev£|nce ^i^^^l'i HW^i ^f feld <F*it$i< ^T3Tfin3II^iT |Reorganization Act, 2000, as the petitioner )r 1997 in the State of Madhya Pradesh, i|epresentation before the State of Madhya ^titioner made a repre^rtation to the Stete decided on merits and thereafter, the challenging the satd deciston of the fact is confirmed by Mr. P.S. l<a?shy, ^o has stated that the petitioner has fited a i^ion of the State of Madhya Prad h. rr|i of the oplnion ths* notrtng surviv^t in this of e petitioner has been attended in Accordingly, the contempt petttion stands Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge