High Court Of ChhattisgarhCONT/774/2017dismissed

Dr. T. S. Sonwani v. Shri Sunil Kumar Kujur

2018-03-06Hon'Ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CONT No. 774 of 2017 • Dr. T. S. Sonwani S/o Shri N.R.Sonwani, Aged About 52 Years Working As An Assistant Professor Sociology And In-Charge Principal And Drawing Disbursal, Officer Also District Organizer, N.S.S. District Gariyaband Posted At Government Veer Surendra Sai Post Graduate Lead College, Gariyaband, District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

• Shri Sunil Kumar Kujur Additional Chief Secretary, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Department of Higher Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh ..............Contemnor ---- Respondent For Petitioner :

Shri M.P.S. Bhatia, Advocate For Respondent :

Shri Gagan Tiwari, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 06/03/2018

1. Heard.

2. The instant petition is against the order dated 15.09.2017 passed in WPS No.4798/2017, wherein the Court directed as under:- "4. It is observed that the aforesaid two grounds would require consideration by the respondent authority, before whom, the petitioner has already preferred representation. It is directed that the representation shall be considered and decided within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that thereafter the representation having not been decided, the contempt petition was

preferred, wherein this Court by order dated 04.01.2018 has directed that till the next date of hearing, petitioner shall not be compelled to proceed on transfer vide transfer order dated 14.08.2017. Thereafter, it was extended on 13.02.2018 till the next date of hearing and in the meanwhile on 19.02.2018, the petitioner has been relieved and on 24.02.2018 the charge was taken.

4. The reply which is filed by the respondent wherein it is stated that the order dated 15.09.2017 has been complied with and the representation has been decided on 12.02.2018, therefore, it shows that no deliberate disobedience has been made of the original order passed in WPS No.4798/2017 for which the contempt has been filed.

5. In view of this, the petitioner shall be at liberty to take his redressal in the appropriate petition. After entire consideration of the fact, I do not find that any deliberate disobedience has been made of the original order. Accordingly, the contempt petition is dismissed. Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Ashu