MIGH COURT OF QHHATTISGARH. BIUtSPUR PETITIONiR CQntemptCasetONo. 29 of2010 Ravindra Kumar Roy S/o Shri Y.B. Roy aged about 44 years, Junior Engineer Durgkondai Distributton Centre Under Operation & Maintenance Dlvision, Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Corapany Ltd. Kanker (C.G.) Versus Shri G.S. Deshpandey, Managing Director, Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution, Company Limited, Danganiya, Raipur IContempt Petition under Article 21S of the Constitutlon of India read wifh Sectlon 12 of the Contempt of Courts Actt Appearance: Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate forthe petitioner. None for t'ne respondent. RESpQNDiNI ORALORDgR (03.03.2010) SUNIL KUMAR SINMA. J. Heard on admission. Petitioner-Ravindra Kumar Roy has fited this petitton for inttiation of proceedings of contempt against the respondent for the alleged default in compliance ofthe order dated 3.7.2009 passed in W.P. No. 1385/2002. This Court white disposing of the said wrlt petition passed the following order on 3.7.2009:- "(n view of the fact that the petition was filed on 9.7.2002 and the stay was also granted in favour of the petitioner, the transfer order so far as it relates to the petitioner is hereby quashed. However, the comp^ent authority would be at liberty to pass an orcier if the administrative exigency so warrants. Counsel for the petitioner submits that for the intervening period saiary of the petitioner has not been paid. This grievance can be raised by the petitloner by way of representation to the authonties concemed. \ With the aforesaid observation, the petitlon stands disposed of." Contempt Case (C) No. 29 of201@ d/'^ Mr. C.R. Sahu submits that thereafter the petitioner had made representations to the respondent but the representatlons have not been disposed of so far. Since the order passed by this Court was not a time bound ©rder so far as representation is concerned, therefore, if the representation, fijed by the petitioner, has not been disposed ot' so far, it would not amount to contempt of the order dated 3.7.2009. In view of the above, I do not find any good ground tbr inltiation of proceeding of contempt agalnst the respondent. The petition has no merit, the same is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily. — \ Sd/- 1 Sunil Kumar Sinha 1 Judge vatfi