t"-,! L•@ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILAPUR CONTBMPT PETITON N0. ^—-^of 2006 IN THE MATTBR OF: <». . W.P. No.3347/2003 between W^^9:' Petitioners: Sanjay Kumar<CJai^)85 another Versus Respondents: APPLICANT ,^7 ^/^y^/' y^y / t<~ ..,^ ^.;' ..•^. CONTEMNOR vs Coal India Limited 85 others 1. P.K. Nagal, Manager, son of Shri F.C. Choudhary, aged 46 years, resident of Rescue Room, Govinda Colony, Post Office Kotma Colliery, District Anuppur (M.P.) 2. Shri A.K. Barve, Manager, Adult, resident of Beherabandh, Hasdeo Area, District Koriya. Shashi Kumar, Chairman, Coal India Limited, Coal Bha^wan, Netaji Subhash Marg, Kolkata (W.B.) PETITION UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE CONTEMPT_^)F COURTS ACT, 1973 READ WITH ARTICLB'SlS OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. XPHC^fe ^ 3n^T^»T R»iich^i^<i $hHi<^^lft<T V-y" J • \.... i^^F?^^ 3^^H^H^W, 3ll^lM5(c»» WWFTTflFPWE' <<<W^ 200 ^^.......... /s^, n^rr 3TWTW(TTW«ft(T Contempt Petition Nos 23-6-2006 <shi<<I<n<fl^ ii^<r?t ^toA<l^it^K W^T^I 20/06 & 47/06 and M.C^C.Nos.77/05, 80/06,181/06and 182/06 Shri B.P.Sharmaand] Dr.N.K. Shukla. Sr. A the respondent/Shashi Kum >1 Shri Alok Bakshi, counsel for the petitioners. dvocate with Shri Praveen Das, counsei for r, Chairman, Coal India Limited. It is pointed out b^ tearned Sr. Counsel appearing for the respondent that M.C.C. Nos.1 fiied by the respondent for e)( They are also listed today. Heard learned counsel This common order sh| 47/06 and ^A.C.C. Nos.77/05, This Court whiie dispo 3907/2003, 3347/2003 & 377 ^7/05, 180/06, 181/06 and 182/06 have been rtension of time to decide the representation. for the parties. aii dispose of Contempt Petition Nos.20/06 & 180/06, 181/06 and 182/06 >ing of bunch of Writ Petition Nos. 588/2001, ft/2003 vide common order dated 18-10-2004 Jndia Limited. it was fuah directed the rival parties to n|iake the detailed representation to the Coai ^r directed that the Chairman, Coai Incia Limited, either may hear ^imseif or may constitute a High Pov^er 1l^cide the representations in accordance with months from the date of receipts of the Comminee t6 consider and d< taw within a period of thre^ represenration. tt was also 4rectec^that the Chairman of the Comminee may evoive its own modati(ies for deciding the representation. The petitioners submitted the repr^sentation to the respondent. which was not (^^^' y ll;ifiiiiiiii«ill" •sy W^T^T ^»n^»<w^i sFRTO^T^T 3^ •<<i<<i<n<4, t9T(1<i'i<?, Rldlti^< ^TMSfcft ^l^dl (bHlcn "-----••••--•----^ 200 f^^:' fT^?T <W^T^<TW<^^ --2.1 decided within the stipulated M.C.C. bearing No.78/2005 representation. The said M.C. dated 25/8/2005 and the respo^ the representation till 31s! Octok{< be decided. Contempt Petition Nos. petitioners against the non-com) and M.C.C. Nos. 77/05, 180/0( the respondent for extension of Learned Sr. Counsel app| compliance of the order of thj constituted and the Commitl 23/8/2005. It is further submit office and a note was pui up on| aiso submitted that some peti' Judicature at Kolkatta where) restraining, the respondents because of obtainina 1 Ctass it is stated by the iearnec that now the order has beer 12/6/2006 and communlcated Learned Sr. Counsel appearin{ unconditional apology and st; <»»i^t<n41^w^ft ^ te^t <F3it^i< ^3lKl^3H^T >eriod. Thereafter, the respondent filed For extension of time to decide the ^. was allowed by this Court vide order ident was granted further time to decide er, 2005. but the representation coutd not >0/06 and 47/06 have been filed by the )liance of the order passed by this Court >, 181/06 and 182/06 have been filed by ime to decide the representation. ^aring for the respondent submitted that in |s Court, a High Power Committee v^as lee submitted its recommendaiion on |ed tnat the matter vvas exammea Dy tnc 18/9/2005 bnrsging out the anomaiies. it is |ons v^ere pending in the High Courr of |n an order of injunction v/as passed |or giving any promotion auromaticady (MCC. Sr. counsei appeanng for the respondent passed by the Coai India Limited on Ito^the petitioners on 14/6/2006 or so. for the respondent however tendered an Ited that due to several difficutties the (<ftt^fe^ 3^? ^Ni<vt^, ^Tfl<i<i<p, f^<ni^y 3ll^l<4S<t»l MIM^I tb^lcb •••-••-•---••--•^ 200 /C^% f^s w^fi^r R^Itll ^l^l $hHl<ft ^ft<T ^ Jij-: VH/- W^T ^RTTOC ^feT --^4- ^ representationcould not be| reiterated the same atthe Ba| Learned cddnsel appet the order passed by the respl' petitioners. The respondent to su| supplied, to each of the <| preferably within a period of Having consiaered the) material on record and keepl time on the grounds ment proceedings are dropped. Accordingiy, disposed of. Since the order has b< Nos. 77/05, 180/06, 181/06 disposed of. Copy of this order be Certified cop^ as per 4»l^fd^fl-i^IHdT ^ fe^ <Rl^K ^3;rf^T3in^T decided within the stipulated period. He aring for the petitioners prays that the copy ot )ndent on 12/6/2006 may be supplied to the )pty copy of the order passed, if not aiready ,oncerned employee as eariy as possibte 5 days. facts and circumstances of the case and the |ng in view the prayer made for extension ot ioned in those procecdings, the contempt Conterrlpt Pexition Nos.20/06 and 47/06 stand len passed by the Coai india Limited. N4.CC and 182/06 for extension of time a;so stana )iaced in all the aforesaid cases. ijles. Sd/- Fakhruddin Judge (^^r^/ ^ ^. '^^