HIGH COURT OFCHHATTSSGARH AT BILASPUR CONTEMPT CAS£iC} N0.334 Qf 2009 11 PETiTIONER RESPONDENT Hemiata Thakur, W/o Prakash Singh Thakur, aged about 44 years, Occupation Service, Women Heaith Worker Commuhity Health Centre, Simga, posted as Sub- Heaith Centre, Dharamkheda, R/o Dharamkheda, District Raspur(C.G.) Versus Ku. Kiran Maihotra, aged about 40 years, Chief Medical & Hea!th Officer, Back side of Mantrataya Secretariat, Raipur (C.G.) CONTEMPT PETSTION UNDERARTICE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDiA Appearance: Shri Gautam Khetrapal, Counsei for the petitioner. ORALORDER (25.11.2009) SUNiLKUMARSINHA.J. . • - Heard. Pefitioner Hemlata Thakur has fited thjs petltion for initiation of proceedings of contempt against the respondent for the aiieged default in compiiance of the order dated 30.07.2009 passed in VV.P.(S) No.3960/2009. This Court after hearing the aforesaid writ petition passed the foliowing order: "Smt. Maia Dubey, Counse! for the petitioner. Shri ShashankThakur, P.L. forthe State. CONTEMPT CASE (Ci N0.334 OF 2008 At the outset, counse! for the petitioner wants to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file representatron against her impugned transfer order dated 30.06.2009 (Annexure P/1). She however submits that the said authority be directed to decide the representation so made expeditiousiy. Counsel for the State has noobjection if the representation of the petitioner is decided by the authority concerned in accordance with iaw, Apcordingly, the petition is dismissed, as withdrawn withthe liberty as aforesaid." i . Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the representation filed by the petitioner has not been disposed ofso far, therefore, it amounts to violation of the order dated 30.07.2009. ! do not find any force in the arguments advanced by iearned counsel for the petitioner, as no speciflc direction has been given by this Court to dispose of the representation in a particuiar time frame.in absence of any such direction, it cannot be heid that if the representation has not been decided so far, it shall amount to vioiation ofthe order passed by this Court. The petition has no merit. The same is iiable to be dismissedand isaccordinglydismissed. Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge