,X31W~..83VSa33^'3 a@.OT~NO%^s.;wlM,enTO^ VKBCE a®N@aoSS3;gNB3 3®STZ SR@aMW aaenui^@a.E£ASB3>s^£t^ ^ andTea •Sg-n>tTTiB*s*a*g ••^irBB- .. --^ nK-n-S'l- ••"" '"•?' ^anian (xnr •»traa»BoaTABa,?e . _..^.._..._^":..'^.',,,,,. *n r,a-ii:ssi. SSwV^seBSf^mfStQ'fe'wasaxwSs /^i^QW:6^ms^ '.^'.^''. :,<are<»a2aaS''fBfa9Ss<'w{ffTS*a*a /i1^" "~"Z~^"^l~i'^"1""" '° • aaSyey <fi'BTPtTlla*S*2[*S ^»TrB,xq,tre>W*we!T<<-r^s?®T<WirBBqaa fe il.tirsuQaededl Xasstaioas *ptreqa 3(SAyA ensaaA *(©0)yo^gireufsg ^sT-aitSTO pin fTSqaj; 'uoeSpaBupBa ^edTdTOTtM faoAeN pe'^Bti'puoH UBS 3SE>(esd!g *S3Bei£ 81 ^nSep palte *qs(niBqsB(i *8»tia/^ ttStnunissCT qsspns /* ^s saaMaaHE %tS<@g^^ ?© H 7 t*®*!t»of<)T^aa •»ehu9q,uo3 ^/ <*e*3) aadsy-tis sv aaMygizmu? a® aaass' HSZH aa.E HIGHCOURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR. CHHATTISGARH SINGLEBENCH : HON'BLE SHRI H.L. DATTU.C.J. Petitioner: Respondents: Contempt Petition No.64 of 2004 Sudesh Deshmukh Versus Vh/ek Dhand & another Present: Shri Awadh Tripathi, counsel for the petitioner. None appears forthe respondents. ORAL ORDER (Passedon 1st March, 2007) This Court, by its order dated 12.9.2003 in W.P. No.2119 of 2003 had granted an interim order in favour of the petitioner. The interim order is as under: "Shri Kanak Tiwari very fairty submitsthat if time is allowed to the respondents to file additional return, he has no objection but since the. respondents are seeking time the position as exists today shalt be maintained till the next date and the matter may kindly be heard finally on next date. "pie submission of Shri Twrari is just and proper. j Sincetherespondentsareseekingoneweek'stimeto | file additional retum, the time is atiowed and they are \ directed to maintain the status quo as exits today, till the next date of hearing. List the matter for flnal disposal on 26.9.2003." | 't f --.{ , p« 2. Unfortjnately for the petitioner, the matter was not posted on 26.9.2003 and it was posted only on 8-1-2004. This Court had not extended the interim order granted earlier. 3. !t is alleged that the respondents have willfully and deliberately disobeyed the orders and directions issued by this Court by passing order dated 4-2-2004. 4. This Court, while passing the interim order, had specifeally stated that the interim order granted by this Court would operate till the next date of hearing. Thereafter, the Court hadj posted the matter on 26.9.2003. In my opinion, the interim order granted by this Court on 12.9.2003 expired on 26.9.2003. Since the interim order granted eariier was not extended and, therefore, the respondents, by passing order dated 4-2-2004, have removed fhe petitioner. Itcannot be said that the respondents have committed any act of contempt of this Court. In that view, 1 cannot take cognizance of the contempt petition. 5. Accordingly, the contempt peUtion is rejected. Ordered accordingly. 6. Consequently, I.As.No.1548/2004 and 1889/2004, stand disposed of. Sd/- aliefJustice 1 I'1