Kamta Ram Sahu v. Dhanajay Dewangan

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CONT No. 144 of 2020

1. Kamta Ram Sahu S/o Late Jairam Singh Sahu Aged About 59 Years Retired Assistant Manager, Resident Plot No. 22/20, Street No. 05, Matry Kunj, Gandhi Nagar (West), Risali, Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh

2. Komal Kumar Verma S/o Uday Singh Verma Aged About 60 Years Retired Manager, Resident Of Zone No. 1, Street No. 03, New Adarsh Nagar, Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh, ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Dhanajay Dewangan Registrar, Chhattisgarh Cooperative Societies, Office At Vibhag Adhyaksh Bhawan, Block-B, 2nd And 3rd Floor, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Anup Kumar Sharma President/manager, Chhattisgarh Sahkari Sakh Samiti Maryadit, Sector-1, Bhilai Nagar, District Durg Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh

3. Donger Singh Thakur Senior Cooperative Inspector, Office At Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies Durg Division, Bunkar Sangh Bhawan, Santra Bari, Station Road, Durg District Durg Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

None For Respondents 1 & 3 :

Mr. K. Rohan, Advocate.

For Respondent No. 2 :

Mr. Anmol Sharma, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 01.10.2021

1. The present contempt has been filed alleging non-compliance of the order dated 05.10.2018 passed by this Court in WP(S) No. 6551 of 2018.

2. Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, Mr. K Rohan and Mr. Anmol

Sharma, Counsels, appearing for the respondents respectively submit that the order passed by this Court has since been complied with in as much as the respondents have already taken a decision on the issue of enhancement of age of retirement of the employees/officers working under the Sahkari Sakh Samiti Maryadit Bhilai i.e. the respondent No. 4 in the original writ petition. The respondents have taken a decision vide order dated 22.02.2019 holding that the age of retirement cannot be enhanced under the prevailing circumstances. According to the Counsel for the respondents, the said decision dated 22.02.2019 has already been subjected to challenge in a dispute under 55(2) of Cooperative Societies Act before the Deputy Registrar Durg and where the matter is still pending consideration.

3. Given the said submission by the counsel for the respondents, reserving the right of the petitioner to avail other appropriate legal remedies available to him by virtue of the order dated 22.02.2019 passed by the respondents, this Court is of view that the order passed by the respondents stands complied with. Accordingly, the contempt petition stands disposed of and the respondents stand discharged of the contempt proceedings. Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge Jyoti