IN THE H€»N'BLiEHIGH t:OURT OF GHHATriSGARH ATBILASPUft CONTEMPT C^E fCI N0. of2009 -''ehairman, Lal Jharida MajdQor, VrH<m,K\[aspur,^^^a^Bra]Ssh SchoQI Compound, Bilaspur w^ '. ." •" VERSUS . :1-; ^hri A|ok|Katiyar, The Djrecfor, Departn-ienl: of Hoi-ticulture, Raipur CC.G.) Office af Reena Apartment, Pahchmaahi Naka, Raiptir (C.G.) 2. Kishore Kumar Pandey, Dy.''Dj'i-ectcrl-,' ',;1:-: : ;.:'; :: •, • Horiticulturie;Di6paTfment, Sarkanda, BilaspHF(C.G.) BaBSBjagfiH8MISiM:1^1IeTtTIiON.IUND:ER:ARTICt.E,ai.;5iiOil;;'FHE;.•?• Ka§SSUH^i^8B^aiBK y©..,L.':.;:'.,'..' ^gB|||gi^MMU iliNtlA.REAh-;:WIT SECTl6l<l^ ::.lslrs?''"''s%%^^ \'.. "^^}e •s-^. .'. ^~., \^.^' ^y <?• Cbairasn. X»al Jteanda MaJdaoaE "dnl.oa Bilaspyc* Ohansfeyan Rajak, e&^aund, Bilaa^ar <C.G.) ~\ istS^iateufsBitet&i F XI-HC-22 •s^ •^W\v\^, V-Aw^.hwvy. 3iT§[?r •VS^K _. ^if-, ^....^.^}j^0 ^^j ^\ ^FI. 200 ^s '•IIICtT'EhW*) ^t^vs' sn^i^t Ki-li.'ti 311^(1 sb*ii°n^TI?a fc SlI^I^RIIWHfei SB : Hon'bie Shri Manindra Mohan Shrivastava. J. petitio^ier petitiftner 01-03-2011 Shri A.K.Gupta, counsei forthel Shri A.'S.Kachhawaha, counsei This petition has been filed by dated 4/1708 passed in W.P.No.258/09. Learned counsel for the was passed in which the Court grant4< whether the order which was passed the petitioner (non-applicant therein) further directed that if not, the needful] be accordingly flied. Learned counsel for the responaent passed an order as late reguian'zation to the empioyees repre^i award dated 24/12/03 (Annexure P/7)| vide order dated. 4/1/08, the responde award but the award has not beeh empioyees nave Deen reguianzea in they are reguiarized w.e.f. 19/11/98] empioyees are granted pay scaie £jn (Gardenen w.e.f. 24/12/03. it is ai; direction was given by the Court to has been complied with. Qn the otner nana, learned coti vide order dated 4/1/08, the Court haja report indicating whether the order hat jpetitioner. iror responaem N0.1 and 2. the petitioner alleging vioiation of order submitted that on 4/1/08, an order jid 10 days time to fiie report indicating lon the basis of the statement made by has been compiied with or not. it v/as !can be done within 10 days and report <=ti|*lf^l<li-rl 'qPT^t'^ fst<rt <faT^dl< i?3ip<nsn^i argusd that thereaner though the ^s on 16/09/08 (Annexure P/4) granting lentecl oy tne Union, tne DeneTits as per |has not been granted. He submits that nc|ents were directed to complv with the fuliy complied with as though the isen/ice. the order nowhere states that and it also does not show that the sjnd other benefits of the post of n/iali jo submitted that even though a ciear ccjmply with fhe award, oniy a part of that linsel for the respondent submitted that iati directed the respondent therein to file been complied with or not. He Turther ivit^; ^R^T X I-HC-22 an^r^i i<i-fi?b aiig^t 9nH\<^ ^[ft? T •^SI •^nqRTq, riTfl'y'lti. (<«n]^1< 3TI^?T •q^ra? _. C^..,..^.^..S)^ • 2T^/otf '""WI. 200 £f TIIICTI ChHlcb fa'bi^sr' an^i ^Riiwafltt ^- submits that the Court granted thefn liberty and there was no direction as such, even though the respondent appointment to the petitioner. it is consideraflon in me Dendina writ ti proceeded to pass an order of regular &ubmitted that the matter is stlli Dending letition ana the compliance or the oraer dated 4/1/08 is already on the r^cords of the pending writ petition i.e. W.P.No.258/05. It is aiso subml W.P.No.4176/96, a detailed report r|as been submitted which inciudes report regarding compiiance of order dat^d 16709/08 passed in that writ petition. Learnea counsei ror the respondent have alreadv compiied with the o further submitted that as the respondents Mer dated 4/1/08 and the matters are oDservea ffiat it not, neearui can accordingiy fiied. Considering the responaent tnat an oraer or reguia opportunity granted by the Court proceedings, it has been brought to in case, the report, if any, 4/1/08 is not accepted and furtherl the reasons stated above, i am not ctil^lfl^-'l 'RR^lf ^ 'f^St' •(Psl^R: ^? sipgii sii^i tted that in the connected Detition- pending in the Court, this contempt .stetition is pre-mature. Vide order dated 4/1/08 passtd in W.P.No.258/05. timewas granted to file report, as to whether the order h^s been compiied with or not. it was also t)e done within 10 days and report be fctand taken by iearned counsel for the nzation nas Deen passea in exercise OT and further that in the pending writ |the notice of the Court, in the opinlon of this Court, it would be proper that thife parties bring it to the notice of tne Court inthewrit petition. submitted in compliance of order dated orders are passed in the pending writ pemion, tne petrtioner wouia oe at ii^erty to revive mis comempt petrtion. ^or inciined to oroceed further in the matter. 'he ruie is therefore discharged. Tt|ie petition is finaily disposed off however, wlth the llberty as above. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge \, «>-