Y-v.-Y-^-t ^^ 'L-L''\-'Y- \--^ ^•^^-••L.V^-L-^ /u •^ ^, -^ ^. csy^ ... ^^rd^ 8^^fin Contempt Case^o. ^v<'° /2011 ^^yia-' INTHEHIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT PETITIONER .^^ ^^' RE§PQNDENTS CONTEMNORS Ramraj, S/o. Rainchandra, Aged about 40 years, Occupation- Service, R/o. Kumda, 7/8 Mines, Tahsil Vishrampur, District Surguja (C.G.). VERSUS 1. Mr. Anil Kum.ar Sharnia, Aged about 55 years, Mines Manager, S.E.C.L. Kumda, 7/8 Mines, Tahsil Vishrampur, District Surguja (C.G.). 2. Mr. Prashant Shrivastava, Aged about 50 years, Enquiry Officer/Area Project Officer S.E.C.L. Kumda, 7/8 Mines, Tahsil Vishrampur, ' District Surguja (C.G.) CONTEMPT PETITION U/A. 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION R/W. SEC. 10 & 12 OF THE CONTEMFT OF COURT ACT ^ v ^T^T ^T I^W ^^an^r^^^ '^sf ^^W^, ®tl1<!-)<|<o,'fs|<>1i'!-j^< »—.....<^..^..c't-^^^z/&/// ^iN^r ^iiff^ "^" ^ ^I^?T"q^5F ('^[f^Sf^) SB : Hon9ble Shri Manindrja Mohan Shrivastava, J, 30.11.2011 Gni^(^41y<< ^TTR^f ^f f^^t <R3<^K '^'^ffOT^n^r Shri Ashok Kumar SIijukla, counsel for fhe petitioner. Shri P.S. Koshy with respondents. Leamed counsel for pendency of ttiis contempt on 17.10.2011 by respon(| sheet-cum-suspension oi withdrawn. Referring to fhe a^ counsel for the responde^ Shri Vtnod Deshmukh, counsel for fhe [the parties jointly subrait that during ^etition, an order has now been passed [ent No. 1, by which the earlier charge -der dated 27.5.2011 has been [erments made in the reply, leamed tits submits that the issuance of the second charge sheet duri4g pendency ofW.P. No.5846/2005 and during operation of interi^a order dated 11.5.2006 was based on erroneous construction anp mterpretation of the interim order and the officer was of the vie^ that the earlier charge sheet could be substituted by another cl|.arge sheet, but, in tJie matter, no final order has been passed. has now been wifhdrawn Learned counsel for fhe respondents submits ftiat later on, respizing fhe mistake committed, the order He submits that the respondents seek unconditional apology ncjt to repeat this conduct in future. He T XI-HC—78 aT^-^Tl^w ^mw^rwiw Praveeii ^Sf •^tl<LII<rl^, ®Tl1<M4t<o,fsi^ray H(*1€'(I^»lfl^ TF[ 200 ^^i Tra^F (yit^^i) further submits that the aiid vigilant in dealing w Court. Taking into conside^ counsel for the responden earlier meino dated 27 *5,/ and the attending circi 27.5.2011 was issued as| flnal order has been pass| in fhe matter. The rule is therefoi disposed of, The respondents aij1 kind of conduct and it is| and vigUant ui future, 1-espondents shall, in future, be careful fh the matter which is sub judice in the t'ation the submission made by leamed ^ aiid also taking into consideration that 3011 has been withdrawn on 17.10.201 1 tmstances in which the memo dated also taking into consideration that no ^d, I am not inclined t.o proceed fiirttier ^ ^$<4(<vl<ill '?TR^f ^f "fe^ Tf^$R '^^fRFra^i discharged and the petition is linally ;, however, warned not to repeat this observed that they shaU remain careful Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge M