← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhCONT/440/2015disposed off

Chowa Ram Dubey v. R. P. Mandal

2016-01-13Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CONT No. 440 of 2015

1. Chowa Ram Dubey S/o Late Bhuvan Lal Dubey, Aged About 59 Years R/o Nagar Palika Parishad, Bhattapara, Tahsil - Bhattapara, District - Balaudabazar-Bhattapara (Chhattisgarh)

2. Rajendra Kumar Singh S/o Late Manaharan Singh, Aged About 59 Years R/o Nagar Palika Parishad, Bhattapara, Tahsil - Bhattapara, District - Balaudabazar - Bhattapara (Chhattisgarh)

3. Jhadu Ram Baghel S/o Late Agindhar Baghel, Aged About 52 Years R/o Nagar Palika Parishad, Bhattapara, Tahsil - Bhattapara, District - Balaudabazar - Bhattapara (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. R. P. Mandal Aged About 56 Years The Chief Secretary, Urban Administration & Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, P. S. Rakhi, District - Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

2. Vikash Sheel, Aged About 55 Years The Principal Secretary Department Of General Administration Govt. Of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralay, New Raipur, P. S. Rakhi, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

3. Rohit Yadav, Aged About 52 Years The Director, Urban Administration And Development Department, Directorate, New Raipur, P. S. & District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

4. Sunil Chandra Sharma Aged About 58 Years The Chief Municipal Officer, Municipal Council, Bhattapara, District Balodabazar (Chhattisgarh)

5. Tamsan Ratre, Aged About 38 Years At Present Posted As Zone Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondent For Petitioners Shri Bharat Rajput, Advocate For Respondents Shri Arun Sao, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board By

13/01/2016 1.

Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the impugned order has already been complied with.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that though substantial compliance has been made, but there is defect in the order, therefore, the petitioners may be granted liberty to move a fresh writ petition.

3.

In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties, the contempt petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to move a fresh writ petition on the basis of subsequent events. Sd/- JUDGE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA Nirala