'^ •^ HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH. BILASPUR CQNTBMPT^ASEJCt No. 308 of 2009 PETITIONER RESPONDENT 'asiaji.i-; Mukes'h Sharma, s/o Shri Satyanarayan Sharma, aged about 43 years, R/o in front of Dr. Bhagwat, Brahmin Para, Raipur, Tahsil and Dista-ict Raipur (C.G). Vs. Shri Omprakash Choudhary, Comraissioner, Municipal Corporation, Raipur (C.G). Shri Amit Katariya, the then Cominissioner, Municipal Corporation, Raipur (C.G). CONTEMP2L PETITION OTtDER ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITU33QN OF INDIA READ WITH SECTIONS 11 SE 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 Appearance: Mr.M.K. Patel, counsel for the pedtioner. Mr. H.B. Agrawal, Senior Advocate with Smt. Meera Jaiswal, counsel for the respondents. ORAL ORDER (13.01.2010) SUNIL KUMAR SINHA. J. Heard. While disposmg of the W.P(P.I.L). No. 2360/2009, the Division Bench of this Court passed the following orders on 07.05.2009 : 4. Accordingly, it is directed that respondent no.2 Munieipal Corporation, Raipur, shallconsider and decide the aforesaid representation, in accordance with law, on its own merits as early as possible, preferably within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. 5. Learned cbunsel for the petitioner shall supply a copy of representation to the leamed counsel appearing for respondent no.2. 6. In yiew of the foregoing, this petition stands dispbsed of." "V fcw ^y Contempt Case 00. No.308/2009 Contempt Petition was filed on the ground that even after passing of the said order for deciding the representation filed by the petitioner within the stipulated period granted by this Court, respondent no.2 did not take any action and the order was not complied-with, which was a willful default on the part of the respondents. Shri H.B. Agrawal, learned senior Advocate, appearing on hehalf of the respondents submits that the respondents have filed a communication dated 05.1.2010 annexed to I.A.No.1/2010 vide Annexure-A, according to which, the Corporatidn has taken appropriate action and has taken a decision for removal of illegal construction. He submits fhat necessary information has also been sent to Narayan Prasad Verma, Murli Verma and Dasrath Verma, who were respondents in W.P(PIL) No.2360/2009. - After passing ofthe order by this Court, since fhe aforesaid exercise has beeh undertaken by the Corporation and they have taken a decision to remove the illegal construction raised by respondents 3 to 5 ofthewrit petition, I do not find any reason to proceed further in this matter for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents. For the foregoing reasons, the contempt proceedings are droppedat fhis stage. —- Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge •X '-•-.'t' v