'Y '.^, i»'«&<=^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONTEMPT CASEfClNo. ^G 12Q11 (Arising out of Order Dated 09 August 2011 Passed by Hon,Ble Justice Shri S.K.Agnihotri In the matter of Ram Prasad 85 another V/s State of C.G. & others in Writ Petition (C) No 4445/2011) PETITIONERS ^ 7' ^w^ i9^' 49^'. f'"^ <--.^-f> .^ ^ .f /^ l.Rain Prasad S/o Fudru, aged about 60 years, Caste-Raut (Yadav),R/o Village-Udka, Village- Panchayat —Tarwarpur ,Tahsil- Mungeli. 2. Shriram Chandrakar S/o Amoli , aged about 55 years, Caste- Kurmi,R/o Village 8& Pnchayat - Tarwarpur ,Tahsil- Mungeli ,District Bilaspur , C.G. VERSUS G.P.Chaudhary Sub Divisional officer (R) Mungely, Distrct Bilaspur C.G. CONTEMPT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA CONTEMNOR: ^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR Contempt Case(C)N0.440 of 2011 Petitioners Ram Prasad and another Versus Respondent G. P. Chaudhary Contemnor (Contempt Petition underArticle 215 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench: hlon'ble Shri Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, J. Present: - Shri A. K. Yadav, counsel for the petitioners. ORDER (ORAU (Passed on this 16th day of December, 2011) Heard. 2. Learned counsel Jor the petitioners submits that the writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 09-08-2011 and the Court expected that the respondent No.2 shall consider and decide the case of the petitioners as expeditiously as possible. Learned counsel submits that after the order has been passed by this Court, the Sub Divisional Officer is not taking any interest in decision of the case, which is clearly reflected from the order sheets placed on record which shows that the officer is riot available and engaged in other works. 3. The order was passed by the Court on 09-08-2011 and the Court expected that the case of the petitioners shall be decided as expeditiously as possible. Taking into consideration the passage of time, 1 am not inclined to issue notice at this stage, particularly when, no specific time limit has been fixed. However, from the order sheets, it appears that the respondent No.2 is not taking any dedsion in the matter, till date. In case, the decision is not taken by the Sub Divisional Officerwithin a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, which is now being passed, the petitioners would be at liberty to revive this petition. 4. With the aforesaid observation, the petition is finatly disposed off. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge Tumane -1