← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhCONT/594/2016dismissed

Anandram Yadav v. D. Shrinath

2016-12-14Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava1 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CONT No. 594 of 2016 • Anandram Yadav S/o Shri Sukh Singh, Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Bhathoura, Post Bilaibazar, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

• D. Shrinath Posted As Chief General Manager, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Gevra Area, District Korba, Chhattisgarh .................(Contemnor) ---- Respondent --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner :

Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocate --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 14/12/2016 Heard on admission.

1.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while rejecting the representation of the petitioner, the respondent has acted in a manner of willful disobedience, in as much as direction of the order passed by this Court has been wrongly interpreted. It is argued that this Court had directed the respondent to decide the case of the petitioner in the light of observation made by this Court in case of Ku. Rattho Bai and anr. Vs. South Eastern Coalfields Limited and ors. in WPS No. 432/2011. However while deciding the case of the petitioner, the authority has wrongly distinguished the case of the petitioner, whereas the petitioner was identically situated.

2.

After going through the order passed by the authority on 04/06.11.2016, I find that giving reference to the case of Ku. Rattho Bai (supra), the authority has examined the case of the petitioner and for its own reasons sought to distinguish the matter. It is found that the authority by applying its mind, has passed the order to the best of his understanding. Irrespective of the merit of the case, it does not appear to be a case of willful disobedience, therefore, the petition is dismissed reserving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order in separately constituted petition on its own merit.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Chandra