Ramesh Prasad Sharma v. Shri Om Prakash Shrivastav

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CONT No. 935 of 2019 • Ramesh Prasad Sharma S/o Late Shri Ramswaroop Sharma Aged About 55 Years Presently Working At Divisional Office, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, R/o Silver Apartment 303 Choutis Beegha Bahodapur, Post And Post Bahodapur Laxkar Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh.

---- Applicant

Versus

1. Shri Om Prakash Shrivastav Managing Director, Madhya Pradesh Road Transport Corporation Head Office Habib Ganj, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.

2. Shri Alok Katiar Managing Director, Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corporation (Transport Section), Shastri Chowk, Raipur, District Raipur, CG ---- Respondents For applicant : Ms. Veena Nair, Adv.

For Non-applicant : Not noticed.

Hon'ble Shri Sharad Kumar Gupta, Judge ORAL ORDER 27-1-2020 1.

Heard on admission.

2.

The applicant has preferred this contempt petition under Section 12 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 (in short 'Act of sd1971') read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India.

3.

Earlier while deciding the WPS No. 862/2014 filed by the applicant and other persons, this Court vide order dated 18-2-2014 has directed that the applicant and other persons may move representation before MP Road Transport Corporation before whom the claim of the previous set of petitioners namely GK Gupta and others is under process. On submission of representation by the applicant and other persons within a period of one month the same shall be verified and if their cases are similar to the previous set of petitioners, their claim shall also be processes along with the claims of the petitioners of previous writ petition in the matter of G.K. Gupta (supra).

4.

As per para 2 of the petition, the applicant had submitted representation on 2-9-2015.

5.

As per the provisions of Section 20 of the Act of 1971 limitation for

action of contempt is one year from the date on which the contempt is alleged to have been committed.

6.

Instant petition is filed on 22-10-2019.

7.

Looking to the above mentioned facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds that the instant petition is barred by limitation as per provisions of Section 20 of the Act of 1971.

8.

Consequently, the instant petition is not admitted for final hearing and it is dismissed in limine.

Sd/- (Sharad Kumar Gupta) Judge Pathak