Jiyalal Suryawanshi v. Pooja Kumari

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONTEMPT CASE (CIVIL) NO. 495 OF 2019 1.

Jiyalal Suryawanshi S/o Late Shri Hiraman Suryawanshi, Aged About 70 Years, Present Address: Village Bhilmi, Post- Daganiya-Khaira, P.S. Sipat, TahsilBilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 2.

Sarnath Suryawanshi S/o Jiyalal Suryawanshi, Aged About 22 Years, Present Address: Village Bhilmi, Post- Daganiya-Khaira, P.S. Sipat, TahsilBilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioners versus 1.

Pooja Kumari, Manager, Human Resource Department, N.T.P.C. Limited, Post Office- Ujjwal Nagar, Sipat, Tahsil- Masturi, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, Pin Code- 495555.

2.

R.S. Kaul, Assistant General Manager, Human Resource Department, N.T.P.C. Limited, Post Office- Ujjwal Nagar, Sipat, Tahsil- Masturi, DistrictBilaspur, Chhattisgarh. Pin- 495555. 3.

Gurdeep Singh, Chairman Cum Managing Director, N.T.P.C. Limited, Post Office - Ujjwal Nagar, Sipat, Tahsil- Masturi, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. Pin495555. Head Office- Scope Complex, 7, Institutional Area, Lodhi Road, New Delhi- 110003.

... Respondents For Petitioners :

Mr. Sangarsh Pandey, Advocate.

For Respondents :

Dr. N.K. Shukla, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. B.D. Guru, Adv.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 02/12/2019 1.

The present contempt petition has been filed alleging non-compliance of the order dated 18.2.2019 passed by this Court in WPS No. 1053/2019. 2.

This Court while disposing of the said writ petition had directed the respondents to take an appropriate decision on the claim of the petitioner. 3.

Today, learned Senior Counsel Dr. N.K. Shukla and learned counsel Mr. B.D. Guru, both appearing for the respondents, submit that the claim of the petitioner was in fact scrutinized by the respondents and it has been found that the petitioner is not entitled for any relief and thus his claim has been rejected by order dated 1.3.2019.

4.

Given the fact that the respondents have taken a decision on the claim of the petitioner and have rejected the same, this Court is of the opinion that the order passed by this Court stands complied with. Now, so far as the propriety and legality of the order so passed on 1.3.2019 is concerned the same is not one which could be decided under the contempt jurisdiction of this Court. The same would have to be challenged by the petitioner under the writ jurisdiction.

5.

Accordingly, reserving the right of the petitioner, if he feels so, to avail the said remedy, the present contempt petition at this juncture is disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) /sharad/ JUDGE