> B.aiianEltt«a IN THB"mGH COURT OP CHHA'ITtSGARHA'r BIIASPUR (CHHATTISGARH) Contempt Case (0 No. 1^5 /2011. (Arising out oforder dated 19.08.1(Tpassed in writ petition (S) No. 4658/2010 by Hon'ble High Court.) ^ ,/. >rv !© PETITIONERS: ^^ .^^ •••" /,'i-?"^-t .S"* ^y '^y ^!S? Wl' ^ ^ •*!l 7w ^ -< <p ?»"niw^J/ n^" 1. Narayan Pratap, son of KaUash, aged about 45 years, village Khala, Post Karji, Ambikapur, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. 2. Teju, son ofBhUcam, aged about 40 years, viUage Khala, PostKarji, Ambikapur, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. 3. F'aiyam son of Sukhan, aged about 42 years, village Khala, Post Karji, Ambikapur, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. 4. Ghandhan Ram, son ofBuda, aged about 44 years, viU^e Khala, Post Karji, Ambikapur, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. 5. Buti Ram, son of Sukhan, aged about 45 years, village Khala, Post Karji, Ambikapur, Distaict Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. 6. Pradhan, son of Shiyjan, aged about 44 years, viUage Khala, Post Karji, Ainbikapur, District Sai^uja, Chhattisgarh. 7. Pradhan son of Nadhiya Rain.aged about 46 years, vUlage Chirga, Nava Nagar, Ambikapur, Disterict Sarguja, Chhatdsgarh. 8. Sarita, wife ofArul, aged about 35 years, Laxmipur, Ambikapur, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. •^9. Saheshari, dayghter of Lalan, aged about 38 years, Laxmipur, Ambikapur, Chhatdsgarh. 10. Kanchaniya, daughter of Chamru, aged about 45 years, village Laxmipur, Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh. 11. Suresh son of Sukhan, aged about 42 years, viUage Khala, Post Karji, Ainbikapur, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. 12. Manoj son ofKundu, aged about 43 years, viUage Khala, Post Karji, Ambikapur, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. 13. Janardhan son of Mohitram, aged about 46 years, village Khala, Post Karji, Ambikapur, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. 14. Jagsai, son ofAmir Sai, aged about 43 years, viUage Khala, Post Karji, Ambikapur, District Sarguja, CKhattisgarh. Versus Resoondent (Contenuior) Shri D.N-Kashyap, Coimiussioner, Municipal Corporation, Ambikapur, District Sarguja, Chhatdsgarh. CONTEMPT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT. j^i BB t^ -HC-22 sn^r^iT (siiqi ani^r ^>^R yf^ '3^ '<11<1]C1<<, Bfll'M'IS, fal'll'M^ c_^^^rw^w/^ -^ wwu W'*'CS\K.""COU)L(^'^""^J - 'fN^sr' 200 sii^i'Rgiw^te SB : Hon'ble Shri Manindra Mohan 29-03-2011 Shri C. Jayant K. Rao, counsel fl Heard. Learned counsel for the petitio| t)r the petitioners. 2010, this Court directed the respotidents to consider the petitioners representation in the matter of their cla orders have been passed. The writ petition has filed byl disposed off vide order dated 19-08-2^ being made, the respondent No.4-Ccjmmissioner, Municipal Corporation, Ambikapur shall decide the represent; 05-03-2008 issuedby the State Goven law laid down by the Supreme Court Kamatakaandothers vs. Umadevi <P) & Ottiers, (2006)4 SCC 1.\n the absence of therebeing any stipulated rt proceed inthe matter. The petition is therefore finally any decision is taken. ^T£lT^f?ft'TflTH^ll '4 ^ldl if^l^f'i ^aiNitsn^r hrivastava, J. ers submits that though on 19-08- m for regularization, but, till date, no the petitioners, which was finally 10 observing that onrepresentation tion in the light of the circular dated ment and strictly in accordance with in the case of'Secretary, S(ate of riod, at present, I am not inclined to isposed off with liberty to revive, if Sd-/ Mariindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge Tumane [^•^feq