HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR CONTEIVJPT CASE (C ) N0.169 of 2009 PETmQNERS 8 10 Prem Kumar Sahu, S/o Shri Jaggur Lage sahu, aged about 46 years, Assistant Teacher, Govt. Primary School, Pathan Dhorgs, District Rajnandgaon (CG) Bhaggu Ram Sahu, S/o Shri Abhe Ram Sahu, aged about 48 years, Assistant Teacher, Govt. Hr. Sec. School, Kumarda,District Rajnandgaon (CG) Permanand Sahu, S/o Shri Ganesh Ram Sahu, aged about 51 years, Uipper Division Teacher, Govt. H.R. School, Kumarda, District Rajnandgaon (CG) Pauranik Prasad Sharma, S/o Late Shri Madan Prasad Sharma, Aged about 52 years, Upper Division Teacher, Govt. Hr. Sec. School Kumarda, District Rajnandgaon C(G) Smt. Sabna Parveen, aged about 41 years, UDT, W/o Shri Rahim Baksh Kuraishi, Govt. Hr. Sec. School Kumarda, District Rajnandgaon (CG) Pusham Lal Dewangan, S/o Shri Bharat La! Dewangan, aged about 49 years, Upper Division Teacher, Govt. Hr. Sec. Schooi, Kumarda, Dlstrict Rajnandgaon (CG) Smt. Laxmj Khobragarhe, aged about 50 years, UDT, W/o Late Shri Sukharam Khobragarhe, Govt. Hr. Sec. Schooi Kumarda, District Rajnandgaon (CG) Smt. Lata Goswami, aged about 53 years, UDT, W/o Shri Ramnarayan raje, Govt. Hr. Sec. SchooJ Kumarda, District Rajnandgaon (CG) Upendra Kumar Dewangan, aged about 38 years, Prindpal, S/o Shri Siya Ram Dewangan, Govt. Hr. Sec. School Kumarda, District Rajnandgaon (CG) Mahabir Bhagel, aged about 32 years, Peon, S/o Shri Govind Baghet, Govt. Hr. Sec. School '•<<.- ^ CONTEIVIPT CASE (C 1 N0.169 of 2009 Kumarda, District Rajnandgaon (CG) ^^ Verssjs Nand Kumar Verma (Secretary), Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG) CONTEMPT CASE (C ) UNDER ARTICLE 215 OF THE CpNSTSTUTION OF INDIA. Appearance: Shri Somkant Verma, Counsei for the petitioners. Shri Yashwant Singh Thakur, Government Advocate for the respondent. ORAL ORDER (19.01.2010) SUNIL KUIV1AR S8NHA. J. Heard. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the representation fi!ed by the petitloners has aiready been disposed of by the concerned authorlty and the order passed by this Court has been compiied with. He refers to the order dated 03.08.2009 (Annexure R/1) filed aiong with the reply. En view of the above, Searned counsel for the petitioners seeks permlssion to vvithdrawthis contempt petition with liberty to file another petition, if such an exigency arises in future. Permission granted. Accordingly, Contempt Case (C) No. 169 of 2009 is dlsposed of, as withdrawn with the aforesaid iiberty granted in favour of the petitloners. ^ Sd/- SunilKumar Sinha Judge J?AIA-^€