--^ '^ ~^^\.'\i^'^V\^^ •\^/'\^\r^'--^~vy \/-i.-^' BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH BILASPUR CONTEMPT CASE f C1 No. c!4 / 2011 i: PETITIONER 1. ^e>./ .€/- .^/.^'x ^y:^'^ €^y 2. Chunni La-1, S/o Milandas, Aged about 62 years, R/o Soridnangar, Dhamtari, Post, Tehsil & District- Dhamtari (C.G.) Prem Singh S/o Dhanaji Gond, Aged about 56 years, R/oVillage& Post Balodgahan, Th-ana & Tehsil Gurur, District- Durg (C.G.) RESPONDENTS VERSUS 1- 2- 3- M.K. Raut Secretary, Public Works Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, (C.G.) P.K. Janwade Engineer in Chief, Public Works Department, Civil Line, Akashwani Chowk, Raipur (C.G.) V.K. Bhatprahari Chief Engine.er, Public Works Department, Civil Line, Akashwani Chowk, Raipur (C.G.) R.K. Goel Superintending Engineer, Public Works, Department, Raipur Circle No. 2, Civil Line, Akashwani Chowk, Raipur (C.G.) PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTTTUTION OF INDIA 4- nder :- 'a M .•t5?. '.,:'s B% f ^ "'ll il-HC-22 f ^ -TST "i||i|i<ri'Li, ^Ti1'yliii. facii'yy 'q^g? »<IW'!T%t<l<i|i .(A/?..e.,fc-)'^3.(?4/// 200 Iq^ET' ail^T^il h-U'h Sf^f sf)^flcn 'RT^cT \ • si^T^aiw^riOT SB : Hon'bleShri Manindra Mohan Shrivastava. J. 140-2Q11 Shri Satvendra Sahu. counsel By this petition, the petitioner ha^ 26/4/10 passed in writ appeal No.90/10.| Vide order dated 26/4/10 passett disposed off the appeal with a direction representation to the Senior Engineer and decided and appropriate decisiof) possible, preferabiy wrthin a period of of copy ofthe order along with the Leamed counsel for the petition^ made along with a copy of the order Superintending Engineerconsidered th^ and vide memo dated 5/8/2010, appropriate orders to Ihe Chief Enginee|- informed the State Government that regularisation, necessary payment shall| In the opinion of this Court, mem(» that the Superintending Engineer has thereby complied with the order passei? learned counsel for the petitioner that th^ passed an order for grant of appropriat^ to the Chief Engineer, does not app{ Engineer found that before giving a( Engineer's appropriate order is necess^ notice to the respondents. The petition js foi) the petitioners. ha^ alleged non-compliance of order dated in the aforesaid writ appeai, the Court |hat in case, the appeiiants therein move cjoncerned. the same shait beconsidered shall be taten thereon as eariy as t|iree months from the date of production reprefeentation. cbWfl-ift'T^T^^ll''^ ffi^ <pa1-^!< ^T SlPaH SII^T i^re submitted that a representation was <)f the Court on 6/5/10. Thereafter, the matter reiating to claim ofthe petitioners foijwarded the proposal for issuance of nee|- and vide another memo dated 23/8/10, up<tn receiptof appropriate ordera regarding |be made to the petitionere. dated 5/8/10 and 23/08/10 clearly show taken a decision in the matter and has by the Division Bench. Submission of i^ Superintending Engineer ought to have pay scale instead of referring the matter ^al to this Court. The Superintending (ly benefit to the petitioner, the Chief |ry. Therefore, 1 am not inclined to issue js flnally disposed off. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge r