"y--^ ^^ IN THEHONSM^HIGH COURT OF CHJ^TISG^ BILASPUR CONTEMPT CATSE(CIVIL) N0. 37 OF2011 ^n PETITIONER "^^•VY RESPONDENT CONTEMNER ^^- 'vy~ Smt. Urraila Dansena wife of N.P. Dansena, aged about-62 years, Retired Supervisor, R/o Gharghoda Tahsil- Gharghoda Distt. Raigarh (G.G.) VERSUS Ikwendra Kuniar Jatwar S/o not lown to the petttioner, District ^Program Officer (Zila Karkram Adhikari), Women and Child Developraent Department, Jashpur Nagar, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) ...»^:..^*' ^ Program Officer (Zila Karkram €>S^/ -^^ CONTEMPT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT,1971 FOR INITIATING CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE RESPONDENT/ CONTEMNER FOR WILFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER DATED 29.07.10 PASSED BY THIS HON»BLE COURT IN W.P.S. N0. 3939/10. ~n- 'HC-22 3T^T'^T f<Tli<=h 3Tlt?T $b<-iicn 'yf^a ^qf ^||q|(r|<L|, ^Tll^^Ko, [^<ni<Mli< S..:^..^-gT-ln ^I^CII 0 ^R^T' ^T^T'^<TT^R ^rftn SB : Hon'bie Shri Manindra Mohah Shrivastava. J 10-02-2011 thou^h Coll^ctor Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Heard. This petition has been file(J 29/07/10 passed by this Court in] Learned counsel for the was passed by this Court, made, only a part of GPF and| fixation of pension has not takerj of four months, as directed by| though severai representations authorities and though the respondents No.3 and 4 to compiiance of the order of the| granted. From the averments made by the petitioner, it GPF has been paid to the is concerned, respondent - Progt case of the petitioner to the certain queries are pencjing, on been finalised and family benefit In view of the aforesaid c| initiating contempt proceedings c|ounsel for the petitioner. madle appe^rs petitio|ier Joirlt <=hJ^(<rl^rl 'HFT^f ^ 'fe^t <P»i^i< ^7 3?ri^W 3T[^?T alleging disobedience of order dated |W.P.(S)No.3939/10. o|etitioner submitted that after the order severai representations have been Gratuity has been paid but the finai piace, even after expiry of the period this Court. He further submits that |have been made to the respondent has issued letter on 25/08/10 to fjnalise the case and take steps in Court, complete relief has not been in the petition and representat'ions that some amount of Gratuity and and in so far as fixation of pension |'am Officer has forwarded the pension Director, Treasury and Pension and ^ccount of which pension case has not has not been extended. {rcumstances, at present, no case for jagainst the respondent is made out. r^-^fe7t ^... I-HC-22 3TI^T'^T R-lich STT^T sti^w <yf^a c; -^ Deepli ^ -5%T ^qi^i^q^ ^nt^^Ko, fa<ni<i^< 3^?T ^W -. ^v>e_ (^J i^o - <S;^-//r HW^l ^bHlcb 200 fN^y' However, the petitioner may Pension for finai fixation of his pension payment order. The petil the competent authority to pas^ appr(3ach the Joint Director, Treasury and ^ension case with a request to issue ^ioner shali aiso bring to the notjce of pension payment order, the order passed by this Court on 29/07/10.) With the aforesaid observs|tions, the petition is finally disposed off. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge cbl^lfd^'1 'W^ ^ 'fexst <f^^l< '^>3ti;W3T^?r [^^feq