w BEFORE THE COURT OF HIGH CQURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR gjp^ CONTEMPT PETITION N0. ^^ } /2008 PETITIONER ^(S--' ^^'^^A RESPONDENTS CONTEMNORS ,'v^^' R.P. Mishra S/o R.R. Mishra, aged about 50 years, Posted as Section Officer Department of Chhatfisgrah Environment Conservation Board, Raipur, District Raipur C.G. (Petitioner) VERSUS 1. Shri C.B. Paliwal, Cairman JS (E) DOPT, Govt of India 2. Shri I.M. Chahal, Member, Principal Secretary, dealing with SR work in M.P. 3. Shri Jawahar Shrivastava, Member, Principal Secretary, dealing with SR work in C.G. 4. Shri V. Peddanna, Member, Deputy Secretary (SR) DOPT Govt. oflndia, Address of all contemnors- Ministry of Personnel P.G. and Pensions Department of Personnel and Training, Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi. L__ CONTEMPT PBTITION UNDER ARTICLE21^READWITH ARTICLE 14 OF THE CQNTEMPT OF COURT ACT <<(»1CT( 7^r';5Tpn^T, ^Til^^co, [®i<n!^^< .^(3^.,.^.:^.:.^2ll^ ^<4icb.—.>-^^"^...^.—......^ 200 3TI^T TRq7 ( y<t^<i^) ^n^'^'RFri^ ^CT 3TT^f ^{jN» •^- <s«ll<tRirf^cT 3TT^T SB : Hon'bie Shri Manindra Mohan 13-07-2011 <^i<i[^<ii^ ^m^ ^ 'fe^ <Pn^i< ^stfimsiT^r Shrivastava. J. Shri Rakesh Pandey, counsei ^or the petitioner. 1, ShriVivek Shrivastava, standirl Earlier this Court had grant^d time to leamed counsel for the Centrai Government to seek instructions. T states, with reference to letter dated g counsel for Union of india. 3day, iearned counsel for the Union of India 13/7/2010 of Deputy Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Personnei, Pub(c Grievances and.Pensions (Department of Personnei and Training) that the matj:er reiating to allocation is a subject matter of consideration by Ministry of Home Ajffairs and the representation of the petitioner was earlier sent to the Ministry of Hor|ie Affairs for necessary action. The petition fiied by the petiti^ dated 17/04/07 passed jn the case o| Grievances and Pensions to take up I what has been stated by iearned c< >ner has been disposed of in terms of order F B.R; Godboie v. iViunicipai Corporation, Durg and others and o^her connecte|d matters. In the aforesaid orders, this C|ourt had directed the Government of India to take necessary steps for appointmerlt of committee and consideration of cases of aliocation. There is no specific dir^ction in that order to the Ministry of Pubiic :he matter of allocation. Therefore, in view of unsei forthe Union of india, the petitioner's remedy iies in making representation| to the appropriate department i.e. Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of india. jThough ietter dated 13/7/2010 piaced before this Court by iearnedcounsel for the|respondent reveals that the representation of the petitioner has aiready been serjit for necessary action, the petitioner, if so advised, may prefer fresh represent^tion to the concerned department, bringing to their notice, the order passed bythe ^ourt in his case. Y^Rt^Tra—FS/140—2/2011—1,50,000. ff ^'^:^^i m. ^)} I; i.v ^p^/ '%,«^2y 's'^r ^ww^, w^\w^, F^^w^ -. p<l'"i^o. ^//^ TrTO^'^WW"-""'"^^":"/""^"-'""7"""-^200 3^T1^iTTraW (yii^<^T) ^n^?i^ ^jcb WT 3TI^?r sb^jcb L/ Deepii ^«iiW^ a ^S^ — In viewofthe aforesaid discL<ssion, respondents. This petition is accprdihgly disposed to take appropriate steps, in case,| passed by this Court. °M<i(<!i<ii»i"W^ff"? 'f^st' <Fn^i< ^3fRFT3n^T i, 1 am not inclined to issue notice to the off giving liberty to the petitioner the petitioner aileges vioiation of the order Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge i(llti<fl^ <3^ ^"ll^, <1^'II^IH—FS/140—2/2011—1,50,000.