'si^vsfSi^'a^r.isi-'ssffsi 'sv. ,<-•!•:•s (;'-.::B !.'i..s,'.ii3ni;i8siilv!.^i!ssifs r^ ^ ^ c? IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Conterupt Petition. No •<^~?. /2005 APPLICANT Dr. O.P. Tiwari S/o G.P. Tiwari ^ Aged about-40 years, Assistant Surgeon, Veterinary Department, R/o Veterinary Hospital Campus, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS CONTEMNORS ,''>".'>< s^e \,.^>y y ^xy .^•y/ ^"'^. ..-•" /^^/ .»** ^v lf / yd^v' <^-' > ^•1) Dr.H.L. Prajapati Aged about 58 years, Secretary Through: the Secretary, Animal Husbandiy, DKS Bhawan, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ^ 2) Sri Subodh Singh Aged about 48 years Director, Veterinary Health Services, Opp. Ghasidas Mahant Granfhailay, Near CoUector Office, Raipur, Distt- Raipur (C.G.) 3) Sri D.k.Siyar Aged about 50 years, The Joint Director, Veterinaiy Healfh Services, 1st Floor, Composite Building, Opp. CoUectorate Bilaspur District- BUaspur (C.G.) nm"iHii'a'im'''i Contenapt petition U/s 12 contenipt"6f Court Act Read with article 215 of Constitution oflndia ^ '3CTIT^iy(<?Wr,®^OT^.f^RTOy wrar^iTf^:"-&lfc.^.2< Wl200 aii^rwf^te Bwaii^rwite •Vl !SfeIS 311^91 (raq?(^qfgq^) yCT(R^lli(T'3n^CT •<'wfri<i1-i <ii<wT^fe><Sl tKi^ii ^3i)^H3n^?r DIVISION BENCH HON'BLE SHRI A.K. PATNAJK, CJ. HO B!.ESHjRISUNIL^^^^ ;26.<)9-2005. Cont,Petit(onNo.76fef2005. t-teard Mr.Gautam Bh^iduri, learned counset for the applicant and Mr. V.R. Tiwari, learned coun^el for the Contemnors. t^3J> This is a contempt peftion in which the petitioner. comptained of willful violation of the directiod of this Court in the order dated 06-05-2005 in W.P. No. 1518 of 2004 t^ consider the claim of the petitioner for his salary in accordance with th^ relevant rules and pass appropriate orders and communicate such ord^rs to the petitioner within a period of one month ignoring the order ofstispension thatwe have quashed. It appears from the|returnfiled by the respondents that after considering the said claim ^f the petitioner, Oeputy Director, Veterinary Service, Korba sent a comr|)unication dated 31.08.2005 to the petitioner along with a Demand Draf( for Rs.1,95.829/- towards the dues of the petitionertowards his sataryj The case of the petjtioner is that the said sum of Rs.1,95.829/- does not represent the actu^l dues of the petitioner towards his salary for the relevant peripd. His ca^e is that he has been working at Bilaspur and onlyfor part oftheperiod hi^ salary has been paid. A civil contempt has| been defined under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 as willful disobecfience of the order passed by this Court. The order passed by this Court |n W.P. No.1518 of 2004 on 06.05.2005 was a direction to the respondent^ to consitier the claim of the petitioner for his salary in accordance with t^ie relevant rules and pass appropriate ortfers 3P'FS/2005-20,000 ,< :ei \d \/ou i! 13 ron tllE the e,S» fl 1!"' ^ ycq»«f<4|rt^UT¥l<-|!l|g,Rdl^y<< •imwjew €^..^:..^l.('/.^., 3ii^?rwR-ii<h awsn^aipqw r^^ .Ur. ^^il 1 ^1^200 3ntST'raip(>}crf3Ei5) s^iKR^f^ran^T •2-- and communicate such ordi month ignoring the order of the petitioner appears to hs^ ^rs to the petitioner within a period of one ^uspension that was quashed. The claim of ji/e been considered by the respondents but only an amount of Rs.1 ,95,8|29/- has been paid. Hence, the order dated 06-05-2005 passed by this have been complied with. h has not been granted by respondents have committi writ petition inthis Court or for decision in accordance w| With the aforesaid disposedof. Parties are entitted f<* Sd/- Chief Justice qiiirnjll 11<1oV^"fel^l'(R|+<;l'( ^srf^rsn^^ [Court in W.P. No.1518 of 2004 appears to ferely, because the full claim of the peUtioner the respondents, we cannot hold that the sd willful disobedience of the order dated 06/05/2005. In case, the pe|titioner is of the view that some more amount is due towards his salary, s^propriate course- the petitioner is to file a :o lodge a claim before the appropriate forum th law. )bservations, the contempt pefition stands certified copy of this order. fl \ _ Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge