r^r CF IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Contempt Case'No. lh(> /2010(S.B.) ArisingLQUt of W.P. (S) No. 401.9 /2010 PETITIONER/ APPLICANT Panchram Yadav, S/o Punit Ram Yadav, aged about 49 years, Presently working as ^ _»-<.*<•' ^-^^ .--^' 7:"" .c-^^\v <(\.<••• .••••"^.•••<:"\^ :^:.y CONTEMNORS/ RESPONDENTS Forest Guard, Raipur, forest Division Range Sonakhan, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) R/o Village Pithora, Ward No. 3, Distt. Mahasarnund (C.G.) VERSUS Shri Narayan Singh, Secretary Forest Department of State of Chhattisgarh, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) Shfti" Sunil Mishra, Conservator ofForest, Raipur Circle, R/ojail Road Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) CONTEMPT PETITION UNDER SECTION 12 OF CONTEMPT .OF COURT ACT 1971 READ WITH ARTICLE 215 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. 2^3/- S^.l¥%^v1 fflGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR S.B: Hon'.ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra Contempt Case CQ No. 266/2010 PETITIONER : Panchram Yadav Versus RESPONDENTS : Shri Narayan Singh and another Appearance: Shri C.R. Sahu, counsel for the petitioner. CONTEMPT PETmON UNDER SECTION 12 OF CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT 1971 READ WITH ARTICLE 215 OF CONSTrTUTION OF INDIA ORAL ORDER (15.11.; Petitioner's writ petition bearing W.P. (S) No.4019/2010 was disposed ofon 2/08/2010 directing the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for out of tum promotion in view of order dated 21st April 2010 passed in W.P. (S) No.1775/2008 (Devnandan Tiwari and another Vs. State ofC.G. and others). (2) The petitioner appears to have submitted representetion along with copy ofthe order on 7/08/2010 before the Secretary Department of Forest, Govemment of C.G and Conservator of Forest C.G. Leamed counsel for the petitioner would submit that no order has been passed on his representation. (3) On perusal of the order passed by this court in W.P.(S) |No.4019/2010 on 2/08/2010, it would be seen that this court has [directed the respondents to take a decision with regard to the claim of \-& the petitioner within a reasonable time. Admittedly hardly three months have elapsed thereafter and the petitioner has again rushed to this court by preferring this contempt petition. (4) Since the petitioner has preferred this petition immediately after expiry ofthree months from the date ofthe order passed in writ petition, the instant contempt petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to submit a representation before the concemed autfaority along with a copy ofthis order. If such a represenlation is filed the respondents shall take a decision with regard to the petitioner's claim for out oftam promotion as early as possible. (5) With this observation, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge