BEFORE THE HON'BLE HI6H COURT OFCHHArTESGARH AT BILASPUR IQ^J SlBgl8'18 CONTEAAPtf6^ N0.7> ul /2007 l^l^ ' ,./1< PETITIONERS 2. 3T Ku. Jatro Bhagat, D/o. Lote Shrj Bondiya Raro Bhagat, Aged about 29 years, R/o. Village Tolma (Lnilunga), bistrict Raigarh (C.G.). Ku. Prabha Bhagat, D/o. Shri Bairangi Ram Bhagat, Aged about 22 years, - R/o. Dipika Colony, Gevra Project, Korba, District Koriba (C.G.). Ku. Yashoda Bhagat, &/o. Shri Bairangi Ram Bhagat, Aged about 25 years, R/o. Dipika Colony, Korba, bistrict Korba (C.6.) VERSUS 1) 2) B.L Agrawal, S/o. Not known, Secretary, Depart'ment of Health, &.K.S. Bhawan, Mantrolaya, Raipur (C.G.) Surendra Kumar Bhoi^ Chief Medical <& Health Qfficer, Aged about 45 years, R/o. LIC Coldny, Near Collector Offi<:e, Korba, bistrict Korba (C.6.). APPLICATEON UN&ER ARTECLE 215 OF THE CONSTtTUTrON OF INMA ftEAb WITH SECTION.C2/15 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT FOR INITEATtNS CONTEMPT PROCEEbINO A6AINST TJ9T' CONTEMNORS FOR VIOLATEN6 THE ORDER DATE& 18764/07 OF TWCS HON'BLE COURT PASSEb IN WRIT PETETtON (S) N0<6050/06 BETWEEN KU. JATRO BHASAT & OTHERS Vs. STATE OF CHHATn:S6ARH ANb ANOTHER. :!?- T5? •^WW<i, VnS\W\6, ^tfiWy. ^iropn' **^ich C^M.:.^./.0!. Vt, 200 an^yr TISR; ('pfyRff) .Ai^rw h'w* CT3?T^T^41ct) ^+flltirR +if?fl 3TT^?T PETiTIONERS : CONTEMNORS: (Application under Article 215 of i 12/150fthec Wf <^f ^^-ft^ Shri Anand KumarTlwari, c Shri Utkarsh Verma.couns Heard. <ftpiT<n<ili 'WGRft 'if^'fs1^ <R>t^i< ^; aifiiH STI^T Ku. Jatro Bhagat, D./o Late Shri Bondiya Ram Bhaaat, Aged about 29 years, R/o viliage Tolma (Laiiunga), District Raigarh (CG). Ku. Prabha Bhagat, D/o Shri Bairangi Ram Bhagat, Aged about 22 years, R/o Dipika Colony, Gevra Project, Korba, District '.03 i Ku. Yashoda Bhagat, D/o Shri Bairangi Ram Bhagat, aged about 25 years, R/o Dipika C.olony, Korba; District Korba (CG). Versus S.L. Agrawai, S/o Not Known, Secretan/, Department of Health, D.K.S. B'nawan, Mantra!aya, , Raipur (CG). Surendra Kumar Bhoi, Chief Medical & Health Officer, Aged about 45 years, P./o LIC C-olony, Near Coilector Office, Korba, Dlstrict Korba (CG). he Constltutlon of India read with Seection untempt of Courts Acf) ounsei for the oetitioners, s} for the respondsnts. =>'Sn^iw R-fi* ^V ^ii^fl ^i<D ^ ^' 3^^ "'<i<iirt'!<, ®Tn«'i3,fsidw^ ^ WTC'IT **<|cb W], 200 sii^?r 1»a% (^f^5?f) 'RaiwofOTCT^r cbi<ii<n<ihT •qra^f'if 'fe'^^R^R ^?3TfilIT3II^[ Reply has already b^ Shri Utkarsh VermaJ in compllance of this Co4 issued notice on 21.06.200 employee code number, i|i/hich is necessary for making payments to any employee. After filing this ^en filed on behalf ofthe respondents. learned counsei for the respondents submits that; irt Order dated 18.04.2007 the petitionere were| 7 asking them to fili up form in order to obtain the; repty, She petitioners have filled up forms and got the emplpyee code numb^rs. !n addition to this, the petitioners have .not furnished the afRdavit it) acjcordance with law that during that period they haci; not worked at any other pt^ce. They simply gave in writing in a simpie papef which is not in accordancei during the period, the res^ will comply with the orders] In view of above, Therefore, the petition is d| with the requirements. Therefore, if the petitionerg ubmit the affidavit in a FJrescribed lega! format that they have not worked londents wili make the payment to petitioners and do not find any violation ofthe Court Ordeg sposed of. Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge