IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Contempt Case No. -^^V /2011 PETITIONER .^\ ..' ^v^ ;^f / Basanti, Widow of Late Shri Dharamjit, Aged about 25 years, Caste Khairwar (S.T.), R/o. Lokodafai, Charcha Colliery, Police Station Charcha, Tahsil Baikunthpur, District Koriya (C.G.). VERSUS RESPQNDENT CONTEMNOR 1. Mr. Kuldeep Prasad, Aged about 50 years, Chief General Manager, S.E.C.L. Baikunthpur Area, District Koriya (C.G.). CONTEMPT PETITION U/A. 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION R/W. SEC. 10 8s 12 OF THE CONTEMFT OF COURT ACT -——"--—^---.-.- r..... ,.-fe:^. ^^3. ^TT^T^T fqiw WT 3T?^T 5r)^i°h INi^ .-J'^^..„..__ t(TH<?(T <SbW<ib 'S^ ^I^K-I^, '^€l^TT^, f®lc'11<-l'4,< ^_....A^,<^..^&3.,<-o^^) "^ 200 IH 3TI^T T^W (^t35T^) ^TTWRf?^ 3??^?T SB : Hon'bie Shri Manindra MoNan Shrivastava. J. No Ccjurt 09-11-2011 Shri Ashok Kumar Shukia, Learned counsel for the pefi Court on 28/4/2011 in VV.P.(S)V consider the ciaim of the petition^ and pass appropriate order at the As the Chief General Manafaer submitted representation aiong 16/5/2011. However, even thou^h has noi been decided. Learned specific time bound direction has| reflected from the fact that the order at the earliest and the authorfities The petitioner's appiicatjor^ rejected on 10/4/07 which was 4ss 28/4/2011, the order rejecting rerir^ direction was issued to consider p^ atthe eariiest. Though no specific^time representation is to be decided at decide the matter in the spirit of respondent /' Chief Genera! Man^ger months have efapsed. Once eariiest, the respondent shouid the spirit of the order of the Co^rt. instead of issuing notice atthis sta^e, chl^i<ri^1T1 'PrP^cff ^* f^^ Ti^R^H ^3tfiTH 371^1 4ounsei for the petitioner. litioner submits that an order was passed by the >.5930/07 directing the respondents therein to strictiy in accordance with the terms of NCWA larliest. is the competent authority, the petitioner had Nth the order of the Court in his ofrice on aimost six months have elapsed, the matter cjounsei for the petitioner submits that even if no been given. spirit of the order of the Court is directed the respondent to pass appropriate are not deciding the matter. for grant of compassjonate appointment was ^ssaiied in the writ petition. 'v'ide order dated •riresentation was found iilegai and quashed. A ^titioner's appiication and pass appropriate order Ijmit was fixed, yet it was observed that the earjiest, the respondent is under obllgation to order passed by this Court. it appears that the is sitting over the matter and aimost six is a direction to decide the matter at the decision in the matter one way or the other in As no specific time limit has been given, ^, this petition is being disposed of. 95 ftie ;thfe th^re taHe JJ -^' /: '"aai-B!^HC—78 ^WW{ «»*1ich -?^ ^l^i^-M, '^€^FT?, [^dl'H^ &us^6^^o.^&^/; "•^ 200' 3n^7r Tr^^ ('<i?rf3"c^) 3^?T ^>T f^^icb 'TOT 3?n^T sti^icb ^A f; ^ Deeptl ^TTW^f^T 33fI^T if the representation of th4 petitioner is not decided within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of serious view ofthe matter wouid ^ against for wiiifui disobedience of | cM^f<n<flvl '^TTR^ff ^* f^S Tf^gK i?3TRW3:fT^T |copy of the order which is now being passed, \Q taken and the respondent would be proceeded ^he order passed by the Court. Sd/- ManindraMohanShrivastava Judge