HlGtl COURT OF GHHATTISGARH AT BILA$PLLB SINGLE BENCH : HON’BLE SHRI H.L. DATI'U, CJ. ; i i 5 ! Contemgt Pemiog No.38 of 2003 T.G. Goswami, Slo RG‘Goswami, aged 59 years, Occupation-Service presenW working as Pn‘ncipal of D.D.S. Higher Secondary School, Birra, R/o Post-Seoni‘ Tahsil -- Champa, District Jajgir — champa (ca) VERSUS I B.P.S, Netam, Direotor, Directorate of Public Instruction, Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.) ~ 2. B.L.Meravi, JointrDirector, Directorate of Pubiic instruction, Chhattisgarh, Raipur (ca) a Contemg Petition under Artigle 215 of the Comtitution of India. Present: Shri indra Sen Sahu. counse‘ for the Demon”. Shri Pankaj Shrivastava, counsel for the respondents. (PassedW on 4 May, 2007) This Court by its order dated 15.1 0.2003 in writ petition No.3069i2003 had passed the following order and directions : Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having regard to the facts and ciroumstances of the case, it is directed that the petitioner may be allowed to continue on (2) It is the case of the petitioner before this Court that on the date when the order came to be passed by this Court, he was working as Lecturer and therefore, the respondents cannot ask him to work as Shiksha Karml and aiso cannot pay salary of the Shiksha Karmi. Therefore, aceording to the petitioner, the respondents have disobeyed wilfully and deliberately the orders aha directions issued by‘ihts Court on 15.10.2003. (3) Respondents have entered appearance through teamed counsel and they have also filed their detailed counter amdavit along with order passed by the State Government dated 19.08.2003. x‘; 7i . the post on which he is working today until further orders. ' I t}— ,; i i asspouosu‘rs 1. PET!Tl0NER l i l @ , % l (4) A perusal of the aforesaid order would clearly demonstrate that petitibner’s sewices came to be absorbed by the State Government only as Shigksha Karmi, and not as lecturer. On the day when the order came to be paésed by this Court, the petitioner was working as Shiksha Karmi and not as Lecjrturer. If he is continuing on the same post, ln my opinion, the respondents haye not committed any act of disobedience of the orders and directions iss‘ued by this Court. Therefore, l do not intend to take oogn‘zance of this cohtempt petition. Accordingly, the contempt petition ie rejected. Any l l ob‘Eerv‘ations made by me in the course of the order would. not come in the V way of the petitioner urging all the said contentions which are availabte to him in ithe writ petition which is pending before this Court. Ordered accordingly. w . Sdl- Chief Justice " y. e a ‘