^ -^y^ HSGM.COURT OF CHMATTISGARH. 81LASPUM CONTEIViPTCASE N0,71/2006 PETITIONER • Kameshwar Prasad Mahanti. S/o Shri Sada Ram, aged about 57 years, Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Godlkala, Tahsi! Mawagarh, District Durg (C.G.) R/'o viiEage Godikaia, TahsiE Nawagarh, District Durg (C.G. Versus ReSPOlMDENTS 1 B.L. ThaKur. S.D.M./S.D.O. Bemetars, Dlstnct Durg (C.G.) 2 ivl.R. Kaum-arya, Tahsiidar/IViagisfrate, Nawagarh, Distflcl Durg (C.G.) Respondents 1 & 2 niame deleted as per CourS crder • 12.11.2009 and 10.02.2010. 3 B.S. Sldar, Chief Executlve Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Nawagarh, District Durg (C.G.) CONTEMPT PETITiON UNDER ARTiCLE 21&O.F.THE CQNSTITUTION OF ,'ND!A ASE?S3r3nCe : IVirs. Renu Kochar, Counsei'for the petstioner. Mr. Pankaj Shrivastava, Counsci for respondent No^3. ORAL ORDER .(18.11.2010) SUNIL KUivlAK SJNHA. j. Heara. Mr. Kenu Kochar, learned counsel tbr the petitloner pieads no instructions from the'petitjoner. Since there is no representafton on behalt of the petitsoner atter pieading no instructions by 'IVlrs. Renu Kochar, this Court is ieft with no other way except to dismiss this petition for want of prosecutlon. Accordingiy, the contempt petltion is cjismissea for want ofprosecution. Sd/- Sunjl Kumar Sinha Judge