^\^V^O^'^J<</u'^v(<.A.)SJv'v-i./'u"'J'V^'u~^ ? IN THE HIGH COURTOFCHHATtlSGAI?H'A5l-6lLASPUR Coritempf^Case (C) NO.'^^^^^^^^ l Petifioner N^pftam :Sin.g Argal, agecl about 18 years, S/oLate Baburam Jatav, R/o yiINge Jatga,^^^^T^ Distt. Korba i Versus Respondents 1. Heena Animesh Netam,Sub Divisional . OfHcer (Revenue), K^ Korba, transNrred ati as a •^ Divisio^nal Qfficer^^^^^^(^ ^' 2. S&ikha Rajp^ Revenue, Katghora, E)istt. I<x>rl3a CONTEMPTPETITION^TNDERSECTIONi20FGONTEMPT OF COURT ACT 1971 READ WITH ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ;M ^ STT^T'^T ^ic^ <3?nt?T TNr ^if^a Praveea •^ET -Liiqid^, ^T)1yJI<S', fa<ni^y ^.^.^x.-.cy..^-/^ WWr?T^W^ •^ fN^T' ^iTT^T'^TT^R: ^Tft^T SB : Hon'ble Shri Manlnd^a Mohan Sliriva»tava,J. 10.2.2011 Shri Parag Kotecha, Shri Prateek Sharma, c|ounsel for fhe petitioner. I counsel for the respondents. Leamed counsel fo petitioner, at present, is contempt petition. hid Though this Court certain records and thos^ considering fhe fact that though belatedly and conjsidering reply, stating the circumstg|nces fhe rule is dischai^ed. chl^fd-1})^ WR^f "^ 'ftTst i^l^K ^T^rf^FT^Tr^r the petitioner submits that ftie not interested m prosecuting this directed fhe respondent to produce records have also been produeed, fhe petitioner was issued certl&cate the averments made in fhe due to which detey has occurrcd, sNnces The petition is accord(ngly finally disposed of. Sd/- ManindraMobanSbrivastava Judge f^ i[fe^