•^ K~ IN THB HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR / CONTEMPT CASE (Ct N0. IM^ 12011 [ PETITIONER ^Murlidhar Dansena, aged about 55years, S/o Shri Jaideo Prasad Dansena, Assistant Teacher, Govt. Primary School Kiritmal, Block Kharsiya, District .an|l«Benca .[^•i^SS^ '•»uo;:;»dwsl'n-^Q.--- ^^eou^...^r^T ^•'"•'""7^^\ Q0j(,ed. ^Q ^. Raigarh (C.G.) >»NTBMNOR ^ VBRSUS Mr. H.R. Chouhan, Assistant Commissioner, Departinent of Tribal 8& Welfare District Raigarh (C.G.) CONTEMP PETIION UNDBR SECTION 12 & 15 OF CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT RBAD WITH ARTICLE'215 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 37T^T^T f^ri^^ni^i ^RW^I ife^ ^rcl ^l^la^ ?PT, '^atW^, ^<r\l^ <1< WHcr?r9hNlch 3T[^?T 'qiRR ...£..A..C-..^^// '^^sr' 3TI^T'^ff^R'^rf?^T <=hl^fd^11r1 +11N<2lT'?ft^ iPiK-^K ^3Tf^R3^T fSB : Hon'ble Shri Manindra DKEohan Shrivastava, J.1 25.4.2011 Shri Ajay Kumar Barik, c Heard on admission. Leamed counsel for the representation has been made this Court vide its order dal ounsel for the petitioner. petitioner submits that tliough a to the respondent, as directed by &d 7.12.2010 passed in W.P. (S) No.7119/10, fhe representatioti is not being decided and thereby, respondent has committed ^iUful disobedience of the order passed by this Court. In the first round of p^tition, filed by the petitioner for initiatmg contempt proceediii^s, the petition was dismissed, as ^o specific averment as to on which |ved by respondent and that tlie (itioner addressed to respondent is this C/ourt found that there is 1} date copy of order was rece| representation made by the pe\ shown to be submitted in fhe dffice ofthe Block Education Officer on 21.12.2010. Leamed counsel for the| petitioner has filed this frest| though representation dated before respondent, has not representation said to be mad petitioner submits that now the contempt petition because even 21.12.2010 which was submitted decided. Annexure C-2 is ihe s by the petitioner. That does not belen l^-^fet -t-- XI-HC-22 'STI^T'^T f^^Jch 3?T1^T ^TNT^f^ -r^ a v^T Praveen -h- w ^ss -^TNI^PT. ^ftw^. r°«nwy 3TT^?T 'CR^F ^1<4^1 ^^j^*—'*••"—*——••'**'••****"** ^^ 200 ?c|<b<^T* ^TI^T ^^TT9T ^Iid indicate that copy of the sa4 respondent nor is there at Annexure C-3, placed on recot receipt in ftie office of Block fhe Collector. The direction of thisl Commissioner to decide fhe rd inclined to issue aiiy notice submit a copy of the order p^ personally to the present incii Commissioner, Depart.ment ofl who shall acknowledge a receip|t inciunbent In case, fhe representatiofi the Court, the petitioner woul^ appropriate reniedy as may be With fhe aforesaid obst disposed of. <=hl^Fd<4lrl 'RTP^* ^ 1^Tst <F3l<-$i< ^T 3TPW 3^[?[ le was submitted in the office of ly acknowledgement The other 'd, only shows acknowledgment of )ducation Ottlcer and fhe ol'flce of Court was to the Assistant presentation. Therefore, I aili not :o re^pondent The petition shall -ssed by this Court on 7.12.2010 of the office of Assistant Tribal Weltare, District, Raigarh, is not decided as per fhe order of be at liberly to take recoiirse t.o Lvailable t.o hlm under the law. ;rvation, the petition is Imally Sd/- ^ Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge i^^^