Jv^——v.^^.^.^^ '^^^•^^•^^ Se <A IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (€.&.} Contemot Case (0 No. 2>Z^ Of 2011 APPLJCANT/ Petitioner .x>5^^-:< ).>^-'^< ^ x^- ^^ '^ RE§PONDENTS/ Contemnors VERSUS :1. Smt. F.N. bwivedi W/o br. LK. bwivedi, aged about52.years, working as Food & Civil Supply Inspector, burg, R/o R-9, Aadarshnagar, burg, Tahsil & bistrict-Durg (C.G.) Pradeep Pant, aged about 57 years, S/o not known to the petitioner, the then Commissioner-Cum-Secretary, Food <& Civil Supplies, State Government of Chhattisgar'h. Raipur (C.G.) Sonmani Vora/aged about 35 years, S/o not known to the petitioner, birector/Joint Secretary, Food & Civil Supplies, State Government of Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.) Vivek bhandh, Principal Secretary, Food <& Civil Supplies, State Government of Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.) CONTEMPT PETCTION UNbER SECTION 12 OF CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT 1971 REAb WITH ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Fi y" ^ ''•^ss^^'% 311^1 ^FT R<li<=h ^T^I^T^RW . / ^ b^ ^IN^i ShNTcti ?^? ^I^T^i^, ?$Tll'l-i<l<o, fs|<rll^^< ,..6^:....^^..©...v-JDil^t1' •^200 3n^?'e^p(i^^r) ^HW^f^T?^? ^>i^4l^ ^w^i ^ i^ft TP^^K ^'^fRTH3^T^T sB : Hon'bie ShrEnSShlndra Rflot4an"5n7ivaifava7*J7 1-5-09-2011 Ms. Sharmiia Singhai, courfeel for the petitioner. Heard. Learned counsei for the p^ wrlt petltlon flled by the petitioner i representation of the petjtioner accordance with the ruies and norl itltioner submits that way back on 24/10/07, the was disposed off with a direction to consider the and dispose of the same at the eariiest in ns prescribed. Learned counsei for the p^tltioner submits that ever since then, though the i petitsoner was caiied to appear | before the authorities in connection with her representation and applicatlon of passed tlli date wlth regard to tt|ie petltloner's appilcatlon for grant of senlorlty. Learned counsei for the petitioner and Clvil Suppiy Inspector, the ap^ointing authorifry of the petitioner is the Director, Food and Clvll Supplies. It 1 Government directed the Dlrectc{r to Inform with regard to the actlon taken on petitioners application for senioritl Even though, no time ilmit| it is unfortunate that the case of| aimost three years without t'^ Considering the above, th^ decided by the Director at the ear| |the petitioner was heard but no order has been submits that as the petitioner is working as Food further submltted that on 25/06./2011, the but nothing has been done till date. has been fixed, the authorities of the State are under an obsjgation to comply wit| the order ofthe Court v^thin a reasonable ti-me. |the petitioner has remained pendlng for the last |ere being any dedsion. Vlde rnemo dated 25/06/2011, the State has djrecte^l the Director to take declsion In the matter. representation of the petitioner Is required to be iest. as directed bv this Court eariier. if no orders are passed wit(iin two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, serious view of the m^tter wouid be taken and contempt proceedlngs V^\-w^. ^ s/140—2/201—1,50,000. ^ .^^s^^^ ^.^., "'^ Y 3??^T ^5T f<^Jch WT 3?T^T9FRNr Deepti NiN^li «)*110h T^T '^^TFTT^Pqf, ^Tll^^Ko, f^TOy . (^^~. 6^&-Q)\A-o.'z^lii ^-•••"^••""'••••••••••••••••••••"•^•"•-^ 200 3^'<T5W('rt^I} iwrw^itcr ^y^? -^- wouid be Initiated against the respoijisibie offlcer for calious negligence towards the order of the Court. - A copy of this order shail be VVith the aforesaid observati off. '^l^{^4t";T ^(^<rff ^f fc^l <F3t^l< ^T^rtRTH^H^T Lplaced before the Director for due cornpliance. in case, no orders are passed, th^ petltioner ^vould be at libeity to revive this contempt petition. \>ns i directiws. the petition is finaiiy disposed Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge ^W^ ^t^ gS^TT^T, U<t[ r^r^ -l S/l 40—2/2011—1,50,000.