J:i !|! ^ 11 ' K IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPURIC.G.J CQNTEMPTPETmONNO, UR Y20Q5 ^ PETITIQNER ^.^ -••'"'-^" ''A'^'* ^^y'x.; vyv <2<K VERSUS RESPQNDENT Gram Panchayat, Tendu Bhata, Block: Nawagarh (Janjgir), Through its Secretaiy Laxman Singh, S/o. Shri ChaiBaru Singh,aged about 37 years, R/o. Vmage: Tendu Bhata, Post: Sarakhon, Tehsil: Janjgir, District: Janjgir - Champa, Chhattisgarh. , R.Ekka, Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Janjgir, District: Janjgir-Champa, Chhatisgarh. CO^NTBMPT PETITION UNDERARTICE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA . + XI-HC-22 •S^ -<iM\v\^. '•S'SWW, hv\w£t *nwfTwnqi ^raq? j'»^.&a..jii{i...Ly sn^r'qii R;-ii.+ sn^i wriygfig 311^1'?<<nwnf??T Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, Couns^ Heardon admission. This is a petition for initiating th^ Shri R. Ekka.Sub Divisional Officer (F^ Champa'(C.G) . Learned counse! for the has committed contempt by initiatin^ ! Appea! No.7/A-89(15)/2004-05 and b^ order of removal of Panchayat Karmi| namely Ramgopal Rathore. The conternpt of order dated 1/2/2005 pass^ The order passed in abpve Writ| ord.er, this Court has quashed the ord^ the Gram Panchayat for removal of resolirtion of Gram Panchayat date<? aforesaid order/notice, this Court on tl1i Counsei for both the parties that a before the Appellate Authority regardi j passed the order in the following termsl "!t is directed that if th^ pending before the appell^ accordance be dlsposed of in possible preferabty withirj fromthectate CM^I^41'i ^ <^? ^ ^^St ^? aifitiiT sn^r for the petitioner. i^ proceedings 6f contempt against (F^ev^nue), Janjgir, District- Janjgir- submits Shat the non-appiicant itinfa the proceedings of Panchayat passing an order setting aside the iof Gram Panchayat, Tendu-Bhata sijibmission is that this is a gross ssfed in WP No.1220/2003. IPetitionperused. Bythe aforesaid ^r/notice (Annexure P-3) issued by |he pelitioner in pursuance of the 8/112003: While quashing the <e basis of statements made by the pahchayat Appeai is still pending ing removal ofthe petitioner also appeal of the petitioner is l^te authority, the sameshaii with law as early as a period of three months of communi<tation of this order to the said. y, ^ ^ XI-HC-22 siraf^i j i<-fi°b sn^i . sbt]i+ ^lftTf f^- i^.±4 •^f. -sw ^IPTRW, ^frms, 'f^i^ray ^ .si'^-ry./.^ ai^i'B^iwafta —— ^^. ck]'!<fi?i;fl-1 tITtRff t? tti^t -<i%i'i3R ^? sipgq ail^l L&arned counse! for the ^etitioner submits that no appea! wa; sendlng on the said date, therefor^, this order was npnestfof the purpose of directions contained in it. How^ver, taking some differsnt meaning of this order, the proceedings of Sub pivisional Officer was initiated. h'e a!so submits that he not the Appe'l^te Authority. !n view of the order passe<t iedings by the Sub Di'. cont heorderand ma.ygo by' this Court and aiso in '/iev/ of the iiona! Officer, it does not appeal to the conscious of the Court that the a4;t of the Sub Divisional Officer can be classified in the category ofconten^pt. !t may be the case that a person may not be abte to understand the] on drawing the proceedings in his| there is no direction 'for such persol particular order, he. may not be he| contempt regarding the said orcfer in the petitiQnwarrantingeven issu^i The petition has no merits ai| staaeitself. own ways, but the fact remains that if andthere Is no command for'him in a d responsible for any disobedience or 'assed bythe Court. There is. no merit nce of notjce to the other side. id the same is dismissed at the motion Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge J '!».'..!