← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhCONT/534/2015disposed off

Sudarshan Dewangan v. Amitabh Jain

2015-12-07Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CONT No. 534 of 2015 Sudarshan Dewangan S/o Late Shri Panchram Dewangan, Aged About 50 Years Working As Tracer, Office Of Executive Engineer, Champa Division, Public Works Department, Champa, P.S. Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Amitabh Jain , Secretary, Public Works Department, Mantralaya, P.S. Rakhi, Tahsil Aarang, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. D.K. Pradhan, Engineer In Chief, Public Works Department, Raipur, P.S. City Kotwali, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Vijay Kumar Bhatpahare, Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Bilaspur, P.S. Civil Line Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

4. R.S. Tomar, Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Champa Division, P.S. Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ..........(Contemnors) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri CJK Rao, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 07/12/2015 Heard.

1.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even though, order was passed by this Court on 19.07.2013, the steps, as directed by this Court in

paragraph 5 of the order of this order, have not been taken and final orders with regard to the petitioner's services have not been passed.

2.

Upon being enquired, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Bilaspur, Respondent No.3 is appointing authority.

3.

Even if no time limit is fixed for compliance of the order of this Court, the matter cannot be kept without decision indefinitely once a direction has been issued by this Court. In this case, the petition was allowed. Therefore, the respondent No.3 is obliged to take all steps in compliance of direction contained in para 5 of the order of this Court. If it is not being done till that date, it should be done within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. If it is not done, the petitioner would be at liberty to revive contempt petition and this Court may take serious view of non-compliance of the order of this Court. 4.

With the aforesaid observations, the contempt petition is disposed off.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) J U D G E Rekha