•^'^•^~^-^"^~^~J'U"^^\ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Contenipt Case (C) No. *^2- /2011 PETITIONER Vimal Kumari Jaiswal, W/o, -Ramlakhan Jaiswal, aged about 55 years, R/o. Village Amhar, Post Patna, District Korea (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS ^\\ ...^^ ^s^^ ^' ,c.^' ^ ^- ^•••y.^" %.-^ o'^ i] Smt, Anupama Singh, Project Officer, Ekikrit Bal Vikas Sewa Pariyojna, Baikunthpur, District Korea (C.G.) 2] Chandradev Singh Sisodiya, District Programme Officer, Women & Child Welfare, Baikunthpur, District Korea CONTEMPT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 21.^ OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 10 OF CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT. 1071 The petitioner most humbly begs to submit as under:- T HC-22 3n^?r"^T w\^ ^[^ ^^\\csh W^CT T ^"sr'^lTqT^pT, ^ti1<i4i<o, f®i<ni^y 33rT^?r 'cra^ ._...Q^.:....6^..^1^ • 7-^ / ^ 200 ^ HW^[ $b+1icb fN^y* ^TI^T'?^TT^R ^TfN SB : Hon'bie Shri Manindra iViohan cbl^i^^l 'W^ ^ <feTSt <P?1<^1< iT^Tf^m^TiiCT Shrivastava, j. 2S-02-2Q11 Shri Manoj Paranjpe, counsei |ror the petitioner. This contempt petition has b^en fiied by the petitioner alieging wilifui disobedience of order dated 2/8/10 pjassed in W.P.(S) No.4051/10. Learned counsei for the p| aggrieved by an order dated 5/4/201 from service on aliegations of misco»| and in that petition, an interim ord| petitioner is continuing in sen/ice, st^ maintained by boih the parties, tiii th^ Learned counsel for the peti| order was passed by this Court, th^ service. A representation was mad^ respondent /' contemnors and it was | permjtted to continue on the post. issued a certificate on 6/9/10 whichi work on the post of Aahganbadi wo^ order was passed by this Court, th^ order and on the other hand, they Centre-Amhar to one Budhmati Kus9 ^titioner submitted that the petitioner, 10, by which the petitioner was removed ^duct,the aforesaid writ petition was filed ^r was passed to the effect that if the \iusquo as it existed on that day, shaii be next date of hearing. |:ioner submits that on the date, interim petitioner was very much continuing in to the District Coiiector as also to the Ispecifjcaily averred thatthe petitioner be |t is further submitted that the Sarpanch indicates that the petitioner continued to 'ker. It is further submitted that after the respondent refused to compiy with the handed over the charge of Aanganbadi waha. fhe petitioner was removed fl'om the post of Aanganbadi worker vide order dated 5/4/10. it is not a case not communicated. The interim ord shaii be maintained by both the par| of the petitioner that the said order was ?r was passed by the Court to the effect thatifthe petEtioner is continuing in s|en/ice, status quo as existed on that day, :ies, tiii the next date of hearing. In the absence of there being any such a\}erment regarding non-communication of lrff^ tfe-t' ~¥ XI-HC-22 ~3~oET •^Tqi^R^ ^til^^Ko. f^KrlKiy 3SS?.^1^'^/JI '^ 200 ^ MW^\{ 5b<4|Gh "fa^y' ^n^T^Bf ^ob ^TWfflt^ ^ Deepti 4. ^TI^F ^RTT^R; ^rf^T ^_ passii|ig aiiolved olraer order of removai, tiii the date of the absence of any other materiai to rernoved the petitioner, otherwise more days and stayed execution of there being any materiai to show| continuance ofthe petitioner, pursuar^t was working on the day, the interim| accept that the petitioner was continu| interim order was passed. The certificate (Annexure A/3)| Sarpanch has no authority to allowj appointing authority of the petitioner Accordingiy, 1 am not inclined to inJtiat^ the respondents. The petition is therel of the order by this Court, as aiso in ^how that the competent authority who the petitioner to continue for some of removal and in the absence of that any higher authority directed to which the petitioner continued and |order was passed, 1 flnd it unabie to |ng in the office on 2/8/2010, wher^the has ctiNf<n41ri 'HN^f ^ ^^f <f^i<-$i< ^'37PW3TT^T |of the Sarpanch is of no avaii as the the petitioner to continue, when the not passed any order to that effect. ^ any proceedings for contempt against fore dismissed. rivastava M^ra^bnw 1 rfi^/ tROT