mmwmwmmwwww WWW m "“ h.‘ w Auxmrw \. wwu ‘ § @W @ w I ( ‘ F ‘ y’Q/ ’M W , IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ILASPUR CONTEMPTm Cuz>e (() .39”/ I/ OF 2008 ., Y§¢§E ”‘3 «a PETITIONER Laxman Prasad Sahu RESPONDENTS 1. Shri N. K. Aswa‘ CONTEMNERS fk Secretary Department of Home (Police) D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) 2. Shri Amit Kumar Agrawal Dy. inspector General & Senior‘Superintendent of Police, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Shri R. K. Netam Joint Director of Treasury Account & Pension Raipur (C.G.) v/“m PETITION UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE CONTEPT OF wwwy COURTS ACT READ WITH ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA n S/O _ Same Lal Sahu X Aged about 62 Years n @Mwu Retired Constame m $1M Y Kgig .a\¢b R/O _ Mana Camp Raipur (QG') VERSUS . ,.(..i,a.n¢:...§m£¢éi32%a/ox 5K m WW WW $Wm xiv Pravam SB : Hon'ble 81m Manindra M‘bhau Shrivastava, J. 22.2.201 1 for the petitioner. Shri A.S. Rajput, counsel Shn' Satish Gupta, Advod Shri Pankaj Shrivastava, courlsi ate appears under instructions from Learned counsel appearin order passed by this Court has 1 Leanled counsel of th averments made in the reply, observations made by this Cd authorities proceeded in accord; Rule 65 of the C.G. Civil Servi( “the Rules of 1976”). Considering the submissions made by learnedcounsei for the parties and the reply, afddavit filed by the respondents and taking into consideration that the respondent authorities have proceeded against the petitioner by issuing notices under Rule 65 of the Rules of 1976, I am not inclined to pro The rule is therefore discharged. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to take recourse to remedy as may be available to him in case any grievance agamst recovery exists. Mohan Shrlvastava F1 for respondents No. 1 8a 2. g for the petitioner submits that the 3een complied with. e respondents, referring to the has submitted that in View of the nirt and liberty given, respondent pnce with the provision contained in tes (Pension) Rules, 1976 (for short peed further in the matter. Manindra Judge