← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhCONT/224/2015withdrawn

Shitla Awasthi v. Mangla Kadam

2017-07-13Hon'Ble Shri Justice Pritinker Diwaker,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Ram Prasanna Sharma2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CONT No. 88 of 2015 • Shitla Awasthi D/o Shri Manharan, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Ward No. 1, Tahsil Chowk Takhatpur, Police Station And Tahsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur C.G.

---- Petitioner

Versus

• Shri Umesh Shukla, Chief Municipal OfÏcer, Nagar Panchayat, Takhatpur, District Bilaspur C.G.

---- Respondent And CONT No. 224 Of 2015 • Shitla Awasthi D/o Shri Manharan, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Ward No. 1, Tahsil Chowk Takhatpur, Police Station And Tahsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner Vs • Mangla Kadam, Project OfÏcer, Integrated Women And Chief Development Project, Takhatpur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Petitioners :

Shri Mirza Hafeez Baig, Advocate For Respondent :

Shri Manoj Paranjape and Shri S.N.

Nande, Advocates in Cont. No.88/2015 and 224/2015 respectively.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Pritinker Diwaker Hon'ble Shri Justice Ram Prasanna Sharma Order On Board Pritinker Diwaker, J 13/07/2017 (1) Counsel for the petitioner submits that subsequent to filing of the Contempt Petition No.88/2015 the petitioner

has already challenged the order/letter dated 19.01.2015 passed by the Chief Municipal OfÏcer holding the petitioner to be disqualified for her appointment as Anganbadi Karyakarta, by filing Writ Petition No.1272/2015. He further submits that in the said writ petition stay order has already been passed by this Court in favour of the petitioner and, thereafter, the petitioner filed Contempt Petition No. 224/2015. (2) Learned counsel submits that any order passed in the contempt petitions may adversely affect the rights of the petitioner in the pending writ petition and, therefore, he may be permitted to withdraw these contempt petitions with liberty to raise all the points raised in the present petitions before the writ court.

(2) Counsel for respondents submit that the petitioner is always at liberty to contest the writ petition on the grounds available to her.

(3) Accordingly, the contempt petitions are dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as aforesaid.

Sd/- Sd/- (Pritinker Diwaker) (Ram Prasanna Sharma) Judge Judge Vijay