©'3n<°Sii® asii's'" EN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BBLASPUR PETITIONER ^ y-'-- ^'' ^^ -'A' /^ Contempt Case rCiviP No. S 3 of 2011 Omprakash Sharma, aged about 52 years S/o Late Shri Bhagwanlal Sharma, Radiographer, Resident of Chatterji Lane Godripara, Chirimiri, District - Korea (C.G.). / ..'• .^'' •^•' :;>*" ^.^.h'"^ '^y" V VE R S U S RESPONDENT : Dr. Gambhir Singh Thakur, ChiefMedical Officer, Baikunthpur, District-Koria, (C.G.). CONTEMPT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 215 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 12 OF CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT 1973. /-' r. ) XI-HC-22 an^i^ii 1S?IR;3IT^I 9f^\^ ^{ff^ -Tirr-.zrpiRTq, -g^ftws. fawi<iy .^•••^^•^••^ •I^^T' iirwii **<]<*) 311^1 ^RIIWdltct SB : Hon'ble Sfari Manlndra^tohanShrivastava, J. 11.3.2011 Shri R.K. Jaiswal, couns^l for the petitioner. Heard on admission. This petition has been fl).' compliance of the order pa^ No.5332/10. Submission of leamed aggrieved by non-consideratioiji benefit of time-scale-pay, the ^ petitioner was allowed to wift|i pursue his representation. withdraw the petition, this authority to decide fhe rep|i possible, tn accordance with laij Leamed counsel for thereafter, fhe petitioner mad along wifh a copy of the order; since fhe date of submission not been decided. This Court expected from fhe representation as expeditic +i<i[<-i41-i iiiMdl' 4 fe^t <^i'yi< ^aipgiisn^f ed by fhe petitioner alleging non- .sed by this Coiirt in W.P. ^ounsel for fhe petitioner is that of petitioner's claim for grant of ietitioner filed a writ petition. The |idraw the petition with llberty to ^hile aUowing the petitioner to expected from fhe competent ]|resentation as expeditiously as Cdurt |the petitioner submitted fhat ^ a representation on 5.10.2010 but even after lapse of 5 months ()f representation, fhe matter has tthe aufhorities to take decision on iiusly as possible. Considering fhe ' -^A '^fj^i ^.\ ^ XI-HC-22 ^ss -i.\W\v\^, f'1-^WW. hvW^ 31T^?T IRW WHWI awti "W^ 200 fc|<i<ET' sn^f^i! K;-li?b 311^1 **<i+^fta L- Aaveea tact mat no specitic tuue Umit[ not inclined to issue notice to tfthe decision is not taken in 1|i petitioner would be at Uberty t(( It is further observed th^.1 by the Court that representatjjon possible, the competent comply with the order ofthe auft|iority Ccturt With fhe aforesaid obs] disposed of. chI<rf?l4lTT •'•flHfft' "^ (s*^ <T^ ^1< ^i'sifSnHsn^T was prescribed tn the order, I am •espondent at this stage. However, srms of the order of the Court, fhe revive his contempt petition. t once a hope has been expressed be decided as expeditiously as is under an obligation to m its true splrit :rvations, fhe petition is Bnally Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge L i-.'i^^-M 3:.