^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR -c£<-2ir—^.c? CONTEMPT P^K IGNYNO. 112-^/2011 PETITIONERS 1. J.J. Jaiswal, S/oLate Shri J.L. i Jaiswal, aged about 65 years 2. Smt. Rekha Jaiswal, W/o Shri J.J. Jaiswal, aged about 53 years Both are residents of EWS- 1999, In front of Sanskritik Bhawan, Housing Board, P.0. Jamul, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (C.G.) VERSUS Shri Janme Jai Mahobe, Com.m.issioner, Bhilai Municipal Corporation, Head Office Supela, Bhilai, P.0. Bhilai, Distt. Durg (C.G.) CONTEMPT PETITION UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971. CONTEMNOR rncft .^ '?5[ -^iqioq, ®Tilyi(o,'feTray NMCTI ShHltft •""••-•"-••-w""--*—••"•-•-^200 SiI^F 'T^T (1cli31<i<T) vr arttn^ll^W Wl ^E^ st)*ll<t* wnwBteian^r SB : Hon'bie Shri manjndra Mohan Bhrivas'tava. j, 9een ttlat llende 19-08-2011 Shri Ashish Gupta, counsei Shri Ashutosh Singh Kachh^v respondent. This petition has been disobedience oforder dated 31/1/Q9 At the outset, learned couns order passed by the Court has press this Detition. He submits ttla liberty to the petitioner to challen^e appropriate proceedings. On the other hand, learned avermeras made in the replv complied with and a letter was issite Plant for taKins appro.Driate action | and the petitioner was also •informinQ that the case of the p^i concerned officer of the Bhiia) appiication. He submits that the •nout the order of the Court and decision was taken bv the has been filed in the year 2011. flor the petitioner. Kachh^waha and Shri B.L.Sahu, counsel for the fiied by the petitioner aileflina wiliful passed in W'.P No.880/03. (el ror the petitioner submitted that as the comoiied with, he does not wish to this petition may be disposed otf with legality and vaiidity of order passed in resportdent <(>i<<Ip)<il-i Kii<A''ifftigt <R<^i< ^ 3TRlT 3D^f subitnits issited infoilmect sounsel for the respondent referring to the that the order of the Court has been led to the Generai Manaaer of Bhilai Steel vide its memo on 3/1 1 /09 s'Annexure R/1') or the required action to be taKen ititioner has been duiv forwarded to the Steel Plant for consideration of his respondent therefore had no intention to he further submlts that iona. aner the in the matter, the contemDt petition 5rtytft'4i§^i*iit"ii<"w,tf^^h(*rw—FS/I40—-2/2011—i~,so,ooo; «<IN<?(I «**ira» 'S'si ^ww^, •^^\WW, Hdiy'1 '' ~Cw^(s-' '^\"-!> (<L)^0. ^^111 an^r'Taq? (^pf^^'T) a^ ^ii Rt'fi'* ?WT3S^fsF(RT Despii itSlI^ s<niWEiftd sn^i -^ Taking into consideratlon thj for the parties and considering thaf compiied with, 1 am-not inclined to| therefore discharged. The petitio[|i petitioner to take recourse to ^ucfi iaw, if aggrieved by the declsion v| of the petitioner. ^ submissions made by learned counsel t the order of the Court has aireadv been Iproceed further in the matter. The rule is is flnaliy disposed off with liberty to the remedy as may be avaisaDle unaer tne I'hich may uitimateiv be taken in the case <ni«<(n<<ii Hi*f<!if iffgvt <F»l'yi<. ^arRin sii^i Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge ^iiy<£1;<)^Aq ^"Dcwr, <ry-tklri4—FS/140—2/2011—1,50,000. -£__ . 1-s