IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, AT - BILASPUR CONTEMPT CASE (CIVIL) N0. l k'O_OF2011 ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER. DT. 1/3/2011 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION (S) N0. 6925/2008 PETITIONER ^•/yz\ \J ^w-'x^' <ff-'' ^- ^ w ./ '^'..'' '^ /^. ^VJ <y KRISHNA GOPAL YADAV, S/0 SHRI PARAS RAM YADAV AGEDABOUT - 50 YEARS, UPPER-DIVISION TEACHER, IN GOVT. BOYS MIDDLE SCHOOL, SAIDA, BLOCK - TAKHATPUR, DISTRICT - BILASPUR (C. G.) R/0 BAZAR CHOWK, YADUNANDAN NAGAR, BILASPUR, DISTRICT - BILASPUR (C. G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS B^Btoi SHMS. N. PANDA, THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, BILASPUR, DISTRICT - BIALSPUR (C. G.) SHRI RAMPHAL JAISWAL, THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER, BLOCK - PATHARIYA, DISTRICT - BILASPUR (C. G.) CONTEMPT PETITION_ UNDER ARTICLE -215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION - 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF THE COURT ACT, 1971 // an^f^^-IR? Wff 311^1 B-qR, SS : Hon'ble Shri Manindra Kiohan 3'5T '<ll<<lt1<1, B>Ti1y'l6, fsidl'M^'t __Cov-+. ^ s<0^> • ^°/z^f ^n. 200 sn^i Tra^ (ijcitjsf^q^ TOIIWWTOSII^T directed the District Education Officel of the petitioner 'within a period of fo[ District Education Offioer issued rrf ^N?rih WRif 4 fti^ tfSi^iT ^3tfgH31I^T Shri R, 'K. Kesharwani, counse|l for the petitioner. Heard. Learned counsel for Ihe p^titioner submits that this Court had Bllaspur to decide the representation rweeks. Though, on 04-04-2011, the imo in purported compliance of the order of the Court, but, instead of idirecting the Biock Education Officer, Pathariya, direction has been iss(jed to the Block Education Officer, Takhatpur and this fact is brought fo the notice of the District Education It Officer by the petitioner vide merno dated 13-04-2011, but the District Education Offioer has not amenc^ed eariier memo dated 04-04-2011. Learned counsei for the Detitione^ submits that this amounts to wiitful disobedience ofthe order ofthe Coijrt. i Considering that the District ^ducation Officer has taken decision on petitioner's representation by issuijhg direotion on 04-04-2011, i am not inclined to issue notice to the Diyrict Education Officer, at this stage. Hovi/ever, he should consider the petitioner's representation dated 13-04-2011 for issuance of a direij;tion to the proper authotty l.e. Biock Education Officer Pathariya. !f sujtable directions are not issued by' the District Education Officer within a receipt of a copy of this order, the p Witi'i the aforesaid direction, ^Tre^r ^^ra ^g^rf'^, r^-ii^iE^—i- s, Iperiod of one month ft'om th.s date of atitioner would be at libertv to revive. :he petitiojilsfinaliY disposed off. S/A4&- :/2C.ll- ; ,50,000. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge