( gmgw §a§m§i 1N THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (egg CONTEMPT; CASE N0. 9L1 [zooz (Arising out of order dat ’ 10.10.06 passed by Hon’ble .ITistice Shri S.K. Agnihotri in W.P. (S) No. 5510/2006) qJ/Vx/ ‘Bhilip Pille S/0 Shri Saranga Banee WO Badi Koni, Birkona Magra ,Bilaspur (C.G.) ’ VERSUS APPLICANT u . g CONTEMPTNOR 1. J.S. Dixit NON APPLICANT Secretary, Department of Public Works, D.K.Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. S.B. Solanki Engmeer—in—Chief, Department of Public Works, Raipur (C,G.) 3T D.K. Jain Superintending Engineer, Department of Public Works, ' Bilaspur Division, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) 4. PM. Kashyap Executive Engineear, Department of Pulilic Works, Division No.1 Bilaspur Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) X e OF INDIA 9 . m HEGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Confemn‘l' Pe‘ri'rion No. 06 of 2007 Singie Bench:Hon'ble 5hri Satish K. Agniho‘rri, J. -v 5 Mr. 5P. Kaie, counsel for fhe applicant. V . Mr. V.V.5. Moor-my, Senior counse! wifh Mrs. Anju Ahuja, counsel for *he respondem-s‘ ‘ a ORDER (Passed on 6*“ Day of February, 2007) This Court vide order dafed 10.10.2006, passed in WP. (s) No. 5510 of 2006 (Philip Pilie Vs. Sfafe of Chha‘r'i'isgarh and ofhers), dirzcfed ihe concerned au‘ihorify f0 deside fhe represenfaiion wifhin one monfh from ihe da‘fe of receip‘i- of fhe represen‘rafion. I1- appears fha'i' ‘i'he represenfo‘i‘ion couid noi' be decided wifhin fhe prescribed fime. The petifioner has filed fhis confempf petifion on 25.12.2006, sfafing non-compliance of the order of This Courf by The concerned au‘i-horify. v: G 2. Mr. V.V.5. Mocr‘l'hy: learned counsel appearing for fhe responden‘rs/confemnors submifs the? in compliance with fhe order of fhis Couri- dafed 10.10.2006, passed in W. P. (s) 5510 of 2006, Public Works Deparrrmen'i'. Governmenf of Chhaffl‘sgarh. Roipur (06.) hos issued an order dm‘ed 16.1.2007. Learned counsel appearing for fhe respondents/confemnors place a copy of iihe said order dafed 16.1.2007 before fhis Court The document is taken on record. Applican‘l‘ Philip Pille Versus Respondents : J.S. Dixif and oi-hers Presenf: @@ 3. In view of fhe compliance of fhe order of 1'his Cour? by fhe respondems/con‘remnors, nafhing survives in fhis ma'fwr. Hewever: in ihe facfs and circumsi-ances of ‘rhe case, The aufhor-ities are warned noi- io recigr 'rhis canduci in fu+ure. If ihe ’ri‘me is prescribed for compliance of any order of ‘rhis Court fhe order mus? be complied wifh wifhin fhe prescribed Time, ofherwiselif amoun‘is 1'0 confemp'r of Court 4. In lview of ihe foregoing, fhe confemp‘i' pefi‘rion is dismissed. No ’ order as fota‘sfs. i Sd/- SATISH K. ANGNIHOTRI Judge Subhnsh r “ix