HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CONTEMPT CASE (Cl No. 310 ot2008 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS Sushil Kurnar Agrawal, son of Shri Hari Prasad Agrawal, aged about 59 years, resident of Baiga Para, Durg, Distt. Durg(Chhattisgarh). Vs. 1. Prahlad Kumar Tiwari, President, District Education Society, Through Principal, Dau R.P. National Higher Secondary School, Durg, Distt. Durg (Chhattisgarh). \ 2 Heraant Upadhyay, District Education Officer, Durg, District Durg (Chhattisgarh). 3 Nidhi Chhiber, Director, Public Instru.ctions Departraent, Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh). CQNTEMPT PETI'HON UNDER ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT. 1973 Appearance: Mr. H. B. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate with Shri Pankaj Agrawal, for the petitioner. Mr. P. R. Patankar and Mr. Vivek Chopda, Counsel for respondent no. 1 ORAL ORDER (04.02.2010) SUNIL KUMAR SWflA, J, Heard. Petitioner Sushil Kumar Agrawal has filed this petition for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents for willful default in compliance of the order dated 04th March, 2008 passed in W.P.No.29/2000. This Court on 04U1 of March, 2008 disposed of the said writ petition with the following directions vide ^ para-2: -rr-^i. s''^; //'es%- ~\ 1 :^!3ff'^/' Contempt Case (0 No.310./2008 "Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondent no.4 is directed to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the judgment and order dated 28.11.1997 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in W.P. No.546/1991 (Dushyant Kumar Sharma -Vs- State of M.P. and others) and W.P.No. 744 of 1998 (Ramakant Swarnakar Vs. State of M.P. & others) on its merit, in accordance with law, within a period of 12 weeks." Mr. H.B. Agrawal, leamed senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner argues that the order dated 04th of March, 2008 was not complied with, therefore, the contempt petition was filed. A show cause notice was issued to respondent no.l in this matter. Respondent no.l has filed reply to show cause. He contended vide para 6 of the reply that pursuant to the order passed by this Court, letter dated 16.5.2008 was issued to the petitioner to give joining on the post of Lecturer and similar information was given to the Principal. The petitioner gavejoining as lecturer on 20.5.2008. A copy of the letter dated 16.5.2008 has been filed as Annexure R-1/1. It also reveals from the contents of Annexure D filed with the writ petition that the Principal of the concemed institution has also issued a nodce to the petitioner stating therein that the joining of the petitioner on the post of lecturer in Zoology has been accepted on 20.5.2008 and the petitioner would be entitled for payment of salary of the lecturer from 20.5.2008 onwards. Since the school is a government aided institution, therefore, it has been mentioned in the said memo (Annexure D) that the paymerit ofdifference amount etc., shall be made after the account is received from the concerned authority. It appears that thereafter the matter went to the Government and vide order dated 02.11.2000 (Annexure R-l/2) :'»siss»k5 '^^^""^:: Contempt Case CC) No.310./2008 .^.^,^^'' the promotion of the petitioner to the post of Lecturer has notf $J been confirmed. Mr. H.B. Agrawal, submits that the petitioner has already filed a writ petition challenging this order and the said petition has been admitted, reply ete., have been filed. In view of the above facts and circumstances, there appears to be substantial compliance of the order passed by this Court on 04th of March, 2008, particularly, by respondent no.l against whom show cause notice was issued. For the foregoing reasons, I do not deem it appropriate to proceed further in the ruatter of contempt against respondent no. 1. The petition, therefore, is dismissed at this stage. Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge Rao