^.^^WORUPEE IfRUBEESa IN THE HON7BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ^ Contempt Case fC^ N0. /^ / /2011 Singl®Benci Ramavtar Yadav Aged about 47 years, PETITIONER ll ^''^...^i^^, S/o Late Shri Ramkhilavav Yadav L^;:"rT*>^^'""!l Posted in the office of Integrated Child p^^o;:^v^i^tG..U-""tfw' F,^e^u' ,aa»a<*< o^--"" RESPONDENT: (CONTEMNOR) .•'""" ^u" ERSUS /^ 3-v' ^ - ..^. ^, Ritu Sen Presently posted as Collector Koria (C.G.) PETITION UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT_READ WITH ARTICLE ^15 OF THE CONSTITUITON OF IS-1DIA a^^rf^q,- ^sffsiT^rg^N- Deepii T \b *<l*8Cft( ^hHT^ ~S:Sf ^i^[<n^ ^Tll^^co, fs<(rliy^< ^^......^J:-....c^..<..£)...^G.'h^ln "^ 200 3^r "tra^F ('^f^^r) WTW ^rf^T ^2m^T SB: Hon'bleShri ManindraTWoF M^I^^il '^TC?if ^f fe^ TRT^R ^^W^H^T in^5Rnva§@vaTA- 01-12-2011 / Shri Siddharth Shukia, couhsel for the petittoner. Ltearned counset for the p^titioner submits that on a writ petition filed by the petitione^ the writ petition was cjisposed off on recording statement of the State counsel that if the representation |is pending consideration before the Coliector, fte same shall be considered and 41eciGled as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three weeks oi|i its own merits and perspective. Thereafter, the representation was submitted t4 the respondent on 29/09/2011 but even after expiry of three weeks, no deci^jon has been taken, which is an act of willfut disobedience. The statement made at th| wouid be decided within a p^ & bar by the State counsel ttet the representation riod of three weeks obliges the respondent / contemnor to decide the repre^entation. The undertaking given by the State counsel binds the respondent tojact according to the undertaking. It appears that the respondent is completely o(>livious of this lega! position and sitting over the matter till today. The r^pon<(ient should take a decision on the basis of undertaking given before the Coprt, faiiing vriiich, the respondent shall be iiabie for contempt. For the present, the cjontempt petition is disposed off. A copy of this order be p^ced before the respondent for due compliance of order dated 22/09/2011 passed |n W.P.(S) No.5416/11. If no orders are passed as directed by the Court eariier, th^ respondent shaii be liable for appropriate action. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge