MiB^'III'V iS93:s€'W^. \\ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTiSGARH AT BILASPUR Smgle Bench: Hon'ble Shri H.L. Dattu, CJ. •N^ ••i: Petitioners Contemot PeStion No. 71 OF 2005. •» ' 1. Ku. Manju Patd, D/o. Shri B.L Patel, Aged about 33 yeare, R/o. Pujari Nagar, Near -Man/adi Kabristan, Nehru Nagar Ward, Raipur(C.G,) . 2, Smt. Geeta Deshmukh, W/o. Shri Birendra . Deshmukh, Aged about 27 years, R/o. village Bhedsar, Distt. Durg (C.G.) 3. Ku. Savita TTiakur, D/o. Shn M.S. Ram, Aged about 28 years, R/o. Adarsh School Cotony, Farasgaon, Bastar(C.G.$ Vs. Respondent Pramod Singh, Joint Director &' Superintendent, Bhim Rao Ambedkar Smriti Hospital, Raipur (C.G.) Application for initiatina oontempt on the respondent & to punish him for commission ofwillful contempt oflheQrders offhe Coyrt, Present: Shri Kishore Bhaduri, counselfor the petitionere. Shri Utkarsh yerma, Dy. G.A. for the respondent. ORALORDER (Passed onlO'" April,2007) Writ petitioners in writ pefition No.2495 of 2005 are the complainants in this contempt petition. They are of the view that, the respondent in this contempt petition has disobeyed the orders and directions issued by this Court on 17,06.2005, therefore, they are before me in this contempt petition.with a request t6 initiate appropriate contempt proceedings against the respondent and punish himAr his willful and deliberate disobedience t6 the ordeFs and directions'issued by this Court. -•^s • • . • • . • (2) Notice has been Issued and sen/ed'on the respondent and he has filed the counter affidavit. In the said affidavit, it is statec! that has complied with the orders and directions issued by this Cburt. .he has requested to dropthe proeeedings against.him. responefent; Thereftire. fif^^'^{S-I^'i-Si!SE;ljil.^^....-;'.:.^^A:..if-'ly 's- (3) This Couri: while entertaining the writ petition by its order dated 17.06.2005 has passed the following interim order: " Ih the meanwhile the services of the petitioners will not be dispensed with on.expiry of the contract.period, if their services have'~been otherwise foundto besatisfactory." (4) The petitioners are of the view that in behi/een 17.06.2005 and 01.07.2005 the non-applicant/respondent did not permit the petitipners to eontinue to work as nurses in their respective hospitals. On the other hand, the respondent has stataJ on his counter affidavit ttiat aftep Feoeiying the order passed by this Court and after. understanding thepuqsort of the order, the respondent haspermitted the petjtionersto work as nursesfrom 01.07.2005. (5) Having gone through the pleadings of the petitioners as well as the counter affidavit filed tsy the resporident as also the orders passed by this Court, 1 am of the opinion that the respondent has not disobeyed tRe orders and directions issued by this Court deliberately and wilfully. tn the present scenario , 1 am ofthe opinion that cognizance to the contempt petition need ntit be taken by me. Aocordingly, the contempt petition is rejected: Ordered acoordirigly. • T—"r.jT"— ChiefJustice