m THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARHATLBULASPUR C^ty^- CONTEMPT PEIFraO^ fC) N0. ?>3S OF 2011 @^^ PETmONER RESPONDENTS 't'^^ -^^1^:^ ^ft.^^'"'". ^...cC^Vt-* ^^asr-' ,.„....' Oax®^-""1 \v : Rambhajan Patel S/o Late Shri Parath Ram Patel , aged about 67 years, R/o Village- Sondka, Tahsil Kharsiya, District-Raigarh (C.6.) Versus 1. Shri M.5. Paraste, (age and father's name not known to the petitioner) Presently posted and working as Commissioner, Tribal welfare and Development. Pt. R.S. U. Campus, Raipur (C.6.) 2. Shri J.S. Rajput, (096 and father's name not known to the petitioner) Presently posted and working as Assistant Commissioner, Tribal welfare and bevelopment. Raigarh bist. Raigarh (C.6.) CONTEMPT PETITCON UNDER ARTECLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA REAb WrTH SECTION 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT. 1971. Si .^ .^_L£V____ ^ ^^ HTH^IT »»*<l<sh 's^ ^ww^, t9Til<4<i(o, fsidi'yy ..6%£.^.^.lO.)A-o_3a^? i 20C ^IT^T^ ( y^^} S^T^T ftl^Jcb ^TT W^T *Mi4» ^^IW^f^l ^f?^? SB: Hon'ble Shri Manlndra Mohari Shrivastava. J. iiberty to fite representation anc| c?>S4((<vt4l^ TTF?^f ^* fe^ <P»t<^« ^ ^rfRfH 3?T^?T 22-09-2011 Shri Arvind Kumar Dubey, (^ynsel for ie petitioner. Heard. Leamed counsei for the FJetitioner submits that aggrieved by non- payment of leave encashment, a ^vrit petition was flled wherein an order was passed on 13/09/2010 allowing t|ie petftioner to withdraw ttie petltlon with St was expected by the Court that the representatlon of ttie petitioner would be decided by the aufr(@rity concemed within a further period of two mor^hs. Learned counsel for the pe|tJtioner submits that the or^er of tte Court was placed before the Assistant no decision has been taken, thoui A pemsal of order dated pommissioner on 20/09^010, but titi date, }h more than one year is elap^d. 13^39/10 shows that the petittoner was It is unfortunate that respoi the hope expressed by the Cour^ on the statement made by learij direction has not been given, thej permitted to withdraw the writ p^tition with Ijberty to move repre^ntation. This Court expressed hope that t|ie representation woutd be decided within further period oftwo months. ident No.2 has not taken any decision and has been belied. The ord^- was passed led State oounsel. Even though specific hope expressed by the Court requires due consideration. The Assistant C|ommissioner is therefore obt^ed to pass necessary orders in the matter. ^w, u^r^r^- -»s/i 40—2/ 201 1—1,50,000. ^FR'nr^pn^i ?^r ';:^PT!'^T, ^Ti1^4jco, [®i<ni^^< L:..^.^..(S.}A^..:J^r//J ^ "^ 200 \ fc 3^r7SW(lc<I^<^T) 311^1 ^Tl^te ^W3??^T^?N? Deepti l^rr^R ^ri^ ^¥? ^- pas^ed !f no orders are now date of receipt of copy of this approach thts Court for reclressa| a copy of this order before r^pondent expeditiously dispose of this mat(i inW.P.(S)No.5241/10. The petition is finally dispo^ed oft <^l^t4)71 HIH<ylI "^ f^^l TpsS^K ^'3tRlH3?IT^T within a pertod c^ two monfhs from e isrder, the petitloner would be at liberty to of his grievance. The petitroner shall place No.2 and respondent No.2 sh^l |er as observed by this Court on 13/09^010 Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge [- ^Wr^ ^f^ gS^TTc^, U«TV<'n'^ -i S/l 40—2/2011—1,50,000.