rH7HE HIGH COURT OP CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ContemDtB^^ifQNO. ll^ ^2011 ^'S©UJ ^UL^ PETITIONERS: 11 s ,^rv ^- ^^^-{ ?^^' ,^tc' 3} ^ ^ Hein Naravan Sinsh DhruwtS/o Roop Singh, Aged 58 years, Uccupation Service Posted as Aasistant Superinteiident Land record in the offic^ of Assistant Superintendent Land Record, Jani^r» Distdct JaQJ^r-Chaiapa (C.G.) Gopal &!jEigh Netaan S/o Shri Badri Nath Aged 59 years, OccuBatioii Semce Posted as Asaistant Superintendent Land record in the office of Assistant Suuerintendent Land Record, Jaiiigir District Jaai^ir-Champa (C.G.) Rataa Kaiiwai* S/o Slari Kariya Ram, Aged 55 years, Occupation Service F^sted aa Assistexit Superiiitendeiit Land record in the office of Su^rifitendent Land Re<»rd, Janjgir^ District Janj^r-Chaiiipa (C.G.) Dhan Saa^i Kaawar S/o Shri Charaii Sin^i^ Aged about 54 years, Occupatloii as Asslstant Supemitendent l^Iid ilii of Assistant Superititeadent Land Reccxrd, Jaiitgjr, E^striet Jai3flgir- Champa iC.G.} V^gys RESPONDBNT CONTEMNOR Sunil Kuiur S/o Not known aged not known, Secretarv Kevenue and Calamity Management Department, Addi'ess House No.3, Woman Polytechruc Campus, Bairan Bazar, Raipur (C.G.) ^,, CONTEMPT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 215 OP THB CONSTITUTION OF INDIA RBAD WITH SECTION 12 OF THE CONTEMPT QF COURTS ACT '^'^r ^||^H<LI, ^Tii<H^i^, (Gi<ni^<i< ,...oJ..:....O.^..Cc^v^^i^in WH^T^W^ 't^%8T' STT^T^T fqrii<^ ^n^r '^IWHf^ < ^ Deeptj 3TT^T ^cff^R ^Tf^?T SB : Hon'bie Shri Manindra hflohan Shrivastava.jJ <^l^(<n<fl<i 'RTR^TT ^ ft1c^ <I^<^K i? 3?f^R3?n^r Q4.Q4°2011 Shri Rajesh Sharma, counsei fc|r the petitioners. Learned counsei for the petitiohers submits that the writ petition filed by the petitioners was dismissed as r|ot being maintainabte vide order dated 19/11/2009 passed in W.P.(S) No.67 the representation shali be considered its own merits as eariy as possibie 36/09. However, it was expected that and decided in accordance with law on preferabiy within a reasonable time. specific direction was issued by the Thereafter, when no decision was tak^n, the .betitioners fiied another W.P.(S) No.1427/10 which was aiso dismi^sed as withdrawn vide order dated 4/3/2011, reserving iiberty to take recjourse to appropriate forum as may be available under the iaw. Learned counsei for the petitioners submits that even though no ourt, the Court expressed its hope and expected to decide the representatic|n of the petitioners, which having not done, amounts to utter disregards to tijie orders and proceedings ofthe Court. The petition of the petitioners was foi|nd not maintainable and the same was dismissed at the motion stage itself vi<jle order dated 19/11/09. Subsequently, a fresh petition was fiied which was di^missed as withdrawn. In the absence of specific dire^tion by the Court, 1 am not inclined to issue any notice to the respondent. Tijie petition is accordingiy dismissed. S<5/- ManindraMohanShrivastava Judge [^^^^{