© IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Contempt Case (Q No. U / 2011 APPLICANTS/ PETITIONERS ? o^t^" 1. Chandra Kumar Bhoi, S/o Shri Usatrani Bhoi, aged about 39 years, R/o Village .-••^cA-^ Akashkhar, Post Paikin, Block ..^ff^c\s ^>0" ^ ^ ..'..-"'S^"'^""'^...-^* and Tahsil Saraipali, Distt. ^^"so .^<'"""i\ Mahasamund (C.G.) ^^f;.--""^^ ^'<"'"\0 ^^ 2- Lalit Kumar Patel, S/o Shri Ayodhya Prasad Patel, aged about 36 years, Post Kalenda, R/o Village Darripali, Block and Tahsil Saraipali, Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) 3. Rajesh Kumar Bariha, S/o Shri Chatrubhuj Barhia, aged about 39 years, R/o Village Manpali, Post Putka, Block and Tahsil Saraipali, Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) 4. Ashok Kumar Sahu, S/o Shri Lal Bihari Sahu, aged about 37 years, R/o Village Jamdalkha, Post Singhoda, Block and Tahsil Saraipali, Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) 5. Sampat Lal Kathar, S/o Shri Ganesh Ram Kathar, aged about 39 years, R/o Village Makarmuta, Post Singhoda, Block and Tahsil Saraipali, Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) 6. Uttar Kumar Pradhan, S/o Shri Goverdhan Pradhan, aged about 39 years, R/o Village Joba, Post Pandripani, Block and Tahsil Saraipali, Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) VERSUS M. Maheshwari, Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Saraipali, Block /Tahsil- Saraipali, District-Mahasamund (C.G.) CONTEMPT PETITION UNDER SECTION 12 OF CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT READ WITH ARTICLE 215 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. CONTEMNOR/ RESPONDENT ^ v ', W^T'^T k^ v3Tlt?F^ s^^icb <ifia ^^r ^i^iid^i, '^it?TrT?, f®«ni^<i< sniOT "q5ra? .(^_^€^.(c)_^_s^/ n WW1T5h^i*"t <<"'^"<<*'<< ^ 200 fN^^' ^TT^T ^<TTW^f^T G^s^F<n41ri 'HTR^rf ^ f^T^t <F3i<^s< '^^Tf^m^TT^r SB : Hon'ble Shri SVianindra IVio 14-02-2011 Shri K.N.Nande, counsel ft Heard. Learned counsei for the rf< dated 26/09/08 passed in Vv.P.C^ the petition with iiberty to the concemed authorities, who in tu^ for appointment as Shiksha Karrrji merits. Learned counsei for the passed by this Court, the Coil< 30/10/10 (Annexure A/1) but the| order on 12/1/11 (Annexure A| Coiiector. Learned counsel for had passed an order in CQmpiiarjce Coilectors directive by the order passed by this Court. Vide order dated 26/09/0l8, iiberty to make representation petltioners In accordance with Coiiector has taken a view in th^ passed an order which is not in in the opinion of this Court, this of the direction of this Court merits one way or the other. nan Shrivastava. J. >r the petitioners. jetitioners submits that this Court vide order p) No.5409/08 (Annexure P/2) disposed ofr Ipetitioners to make representation to the }n shali consider the cases of the petitioners Karrrti Grade iii in accordance with Jaw on jts own t)etitioners submits that after the order was l^ctor decided the matter vide order dated |Chief Executive Officer has now passed an f4) which is contrary to the order of the |the petitioner submits that as the Coiiector of the directions of this Court, violation of respojident, amounts to wiliful disobedience of the ^lith Ifew ?, this Court disposed ofr the petition with a direction to consider the cases of the on its own merits. it appears that the matter but the Chief Executive Officer had laccord with the view taken by the Coilector. Iwouid not tantamount to wiElfui disobedience bec^'use this Court had not decided the matter on [^ ^fe^ ^f^iL. XI-H^-22 ^.--;- ,^ 3TT^T^T f^iw^ni^T 9h^i°n ^f^a Deepli ~3^T ^l<41d<LI, ^nl^^Ko, f^^i^y WRCf8l5b^8<^ 3TT^T '^R^ -, 6^^fc)vs-0:- ^>]h 200 '^^ST' ^n^T'^nw^n -^?- Therefore, i do not find accordingly dismissed. Howeverj take recourse to such remedy as| ct)l^(<n<fltl 'RPToTf'? 'fe^t' <(^1^l< '^srf^fHOT^T any merit In this petition. The petition is it shali aiways be open for the petitioners to may be avaiiabie to them under the iaw. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge