-...^'^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTJSGARH. BILASPUR CONTEMPT CASE IC iNo.201.^010 PETiTIONER EiSPONDENT Smt. Tara iVlanl Dubey, VV/o Santosh Dubey, aged about 42 years, presentjy posied and vvorking as Shiksha Karmi Grade- il, Kasturba Gandhi Girls Resjdentiai School, Podi Bachra, BlocK Kadgawan, Distnct Korea (C.G.) Versus Shn Yasnwant Kumar, Chief ixscytlvs Offlcsr, ZIIa Psnchsyst, Korea (C.G.) CgN;rEMPrPETSTiONUND£RARTlCLE,21SQ^T CQNSTITUT10N_OCJND!A ^^y^€St4xv4s^f*<ss&. • »~a2^1-'Sx*"<irf'<M(g *«s*r.iy»-<h» a fvlr. ViveK Ranjan Tiwan. Counsel forthe petrtioner. Mr. Yashwant Slngh Thakur, CounseS for the respondent. OKAL.OKDg.K (1S.11.201S) SUN8L KUiVSAR SINHA, J. Heard. PetJtioner - Smt. Tara Mani Dubey has flted this petltlon for initlation of proceedlngs of contempt against the respondent for willfui defauit in comptiance ot" the order dated 23.08.2010 passed by this Court in VV.P.(S) No.4179/2010. This Court, while issujng notice in W.P.(S) No.4179/2010, passed the foilov^ng order on 23.08.2010: "Submlssion of iearned counsel for the petrtioner is that by rmpugned order; the charae of the post of Superintsndent has been taken away from the petitjoner and the petttioner has also ?rs tfsrgsfsrrsd- Lssrnso counssj ?or the petrtloner submitted that the Coiiector rsad no jurjsdictlon to pass thjs order, as charge of the "'•^•s^''x .;^ ^ ^ ''% 2 CONTEMPT CASE (C 1 No.201/2010 office of Superintendent was given to tne petltloner by the order of the Chief Executive Officer,' Jita Panchavat, Distnct Kona vlde order dated 16.04.2007 (AnneA'urs D-1) flled along vvlth an application for taking documents on record. Taklng Into conslderation the aforesaid submission. status quo as it prevails today shail be malntalned, tiSS the next date of hearing. Learned counsel tor the petrtioner submits that the copy of the interim order dated 23.08.2010 passed by this Court was tiied before the concerned authonties on 26.08.2010. He submlts that even after passsng of the intenm order in favour of the petitioner, the order dated 26.08..201Q (Annexure C/4) was issued relieving the petitloner; therefbre, the petitioner had to fiie this contempt petition. The reply to the contempt petition has been filed. The respondent has contended vide para 5 of the reply that the order dated 23.08.2010 was not in the knowiedge of the concerned authonty, therefore; the order dated 26.08.2010 was passed. As soon as the fact of passing of the interim order dated 23.08.2010 came into the notice of the competent authority, the competent autnorlty proceeded to cancei the order dated 26.08.2010 and aiiowed the petstioner to continue in his prevlous piace of posting. A copy of tne cancelfation order dated 10.09.2010 is filed as Annexure R/2. Since the order dated 26.08.2010 has already been canceiled by tne competent autnonty and the petltloner has been allowed to continue in her previous place of postlng as contended in para 5 of the reply, 1 am' of the opinion that the procsedings ofcontempt shouid now be dropped. Accordingiy; the proceedings of contempt are dropped at this stage. \ Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge