HIGH COURT OF JUBICATGRE A? B!LA5PUR ‘ CHHATTISGARH SINGLE EENCH : HON'BLE SHRI H.L. QATTEJ, Cd. CONTEMET PETH'LQN NO 52 OF 20% §§g§jg§ij§ Dhacram Nahir Aged about 55 years, S/o. Late Shri Ganga Prasad Nahir, Superintendent Engineer Hasdea Ayakat Devempment Authority, ‘1 Biiaspur R/a. C/e. Ram Awat-ar ’ Singh Behind Police Line, Boeripara, Ambikapur Distiict a Surguja (Qhhatiisgarh) *if Versus K t ggigggmgggfi ~ ChiefEngineef/Chairman Non-Apgiicant (nameiy Shri S.K. Sarkar) Minimata Benge Project Water Resouvces Department, Bilaspur (Chhattiegarh) Present : Shri D. Sashidharan, counse! fer the appiicant. Dr. N.K. Shukia, Sr. Advocate with Shri Diiip Dubey, counee! fer the respondent. (GRAL 0RDER) (Fassed on if“ March, 2007) This Ceurt in Writ Petitien Ne.656 of 2004 dated 05.04.2004 has passed the teiiewing order. “Shri Duhey submits that atter the meeting 6f D.P.C., the eetitiener'tvas duty premeteii and pasted as Superintending .1 Engineer vide erder dated 01.10.2003, but subsequentiy he has been reverted t9 the pest 0f Executive Engineer vide impugned erder dated 11".g2004. Learned ceunsei fer the petitiener further submite that he is stiil werking on the pest of Superintending Engineer and the charge has not be taken over. He retied en the decision e? the Supreme Ceurt in caee ef Wa$im Beg V. State ef Utter Pradeeh reperted / in NR 19§8 3C. 1291 (para 20) /.// / e/ Having cons§6ered the fac‘as and circumstances 0f the ca$e, maieria€ at} recam!“ anci as stated by the petitianer iha‘ hé §$ bemg cnntimed on we pas? tiH foday anti the charge has net bash taken aver, as an intérim mea3ure, i€ is difected that ihe petitianer may be aHowed to aantinue a3 such titt the next date of hearing.” ‘ I (2) The‘petitiettet in this aontempt petitio atieges that ineptte of the interim erder'hetng communicated to the respondent, he has not permitted him .to work on the post of Superintending Engineer and therefore, the respondent has committed an act of contempt and therefore thie Court sheuid take cognizance ef the same ahet punish the respendent for hts wittfui and detiberate disobedience of the orders and directions issued by this Court. e e (3) Respondent has tiled his retern before this Court and a brief synoosis. in the return, it is stated that even before the interim erder was communicated to the respondent, the respondent had aiready ‘ relieved the petitioner from the post he was hoiding. e (4) The order passed by this Court is ambiguous and it is stated that if tor any reason, the eetitioner continues to work on the post of Superintending Engineer this Court by an interim measure directed that he may be allowed to continue to work on the said post. ix (5) The respondent on oath stated that even before the order was communicated, he had aiready reiieved the petitioner. if that is so, wmm‘vi; ff the interim order granted wiil not come in we gray of the petitioneri seu h (6) in visw of the above, m my ap§nisn, the respimdem has no£ G ccmmified aw act of contempi by net cbeying the arders and dire§tions isSued by this: Ccurt éated 05.04.2604. Therefore, i camot take cognizance 0f this $ontempt petition. Accarding!y, the Eontempt praceedings are dropped. (7) The ardet passed by me wit! net came in the way ef the V . eetitioner taking ethervgrounds which are avaiiabte te him in the penéing wi'it eetitien. G'eered accerdingiy. (8) Conseauentiy, LAs. No.2563 of 2004 and 3149 of 2004 Sdl- Chief Justice " stand ctisposed of.