<^! 6^-. IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT ^ BILASPUR d^-^ cc^?o Contempt PetttioaNo. t5 /2010 ^nflle EETITIONER ^ ^^^ 5mt. Chandan Kunwar Manikpuri, aged about 68 years, Wd/o Late Shri Balak Das, R/o Tikrapara, .••••':^\J.\SJ^V ^^^ ^^<-"" Tahsil and District Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS ^- >»' RESPONDENTS :- 1. Nand Kumar, Secretary, School ^ONTEMNORS Education, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. B.L. Kurre, District Education Officer, Bilaspur (C.G.) 3. D.L. Sandey, Block Education Officer, Block Bilha, District Bilaspur (C.G) CONTEMPT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTIQN 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF THE COURT ACT. 1971. m^ 371^T^T [<-lJ<=h 3^?T st)^i^ <^%a M 'l.. f o^ '^sf ^||<4id^ ^•a1<i<i<o, fa<rti^y *11WrlT WH[^ 3ff^T ^^K __:.&}.b;Sfe)./£.;..^/20^b '^^s' ^n^r'^Tw^rf^r GM^?<n<flri ^i^<riT "^ Fs^ <p3i^,i< ^T'3rf;nH377^ S.B: HON'BLE SHRI MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA. J. 03.02.2011 Shri Vimlesh Bajpai, counsel forthje petitioner. Under instructions from Shri Vipir) Tiwari, Ms. Pushpa Dwivedi, counsel appears for respondentsNo.2 & 3. This contempt petition has been fil^d by the petitioner alleging violation of order passed by this Court on 22.4.20(] wherein this Court while setting aside t[} petitioner is entitled to full retrial benefit| amount so deducted be paid to the petitio| In reply filed by respondents No.21 which was recovered from the petitioner i^ was passed bythis Court, has been refunj Submission ofthe learned counsel full pensionery benefits have not been r^ contempt petition. The order ofthis Cou| retrial benefits, without any deduction anc^ thte context of the recovery .proceedin|gs which were initiated against the petitioner. [that the amount which wa^ recoviered (s again been deducted. In respept of jng to non-payment of his full retrial In the opinion of this Court,, no r It i is not the case pf; tt^e cpetitioner and later on refunded to the petitioner hc other grtevances of the petitioner relati benefits, remedy thereof lies elsewhen contempf is made out against the responc Rule is discharged. I^?P?titipn,cthpnefo^ii§(di8nr)jssefd^r r^o - ^; s«.W pCJt.C*.^;^..^. ...^ ^.'..^^...l , 18 in Writ Petition (S) No. 3737/2006 |e order of recovery, directed that the ^, without any deduction and that the lerwith simple interest. & 3, it has been stated that the amount inder recovery proceedings, after order Jed to the petitioner. ffor the petitioner is that the petitjoner's leased, which is subject matter in this "t is that the petitioner is entitled to full the amount so deducted was made in ents. ^^^w Mamndra^^ [Tft^ ^fo^