Rameshchandra Yadav v. A.K. Chandrakar

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CONT No. 1027 of 2018 • Rameshchandra Yadav S/o Jaidayal Singh Yadav Aged About 77 Years R/o Ward No. 4, Main Road, Katghora, Police Station And Tahsil Katghora, District Korba, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

• A.K. Chandrakar, Block Education Officer, Podi Uproda, District Korba, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Petitioner :

Shri H.B.Agrawal, senior counsel along with Ms. Richa Dwivedi, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 23/01/2020 Heard.

This contempt petition has been filed alleging willful disobedience of order dated 31/01/2017 passed in W.P. No.4986/2005. 2.

By the aforesaid order, this Court, without deciding any claim of the petitioner on merits, disposed off the petition with liberty to the petitioner to submit various claims and also directing respondent No.5 therein to examine petitioner's claim and submit before the Joint Director, Treasury and Pension for scrutiny and payment of dues, if any. This Court had further granted liberty that in case, the petitioner is not satisfied, he shall be at liberty to approach this Court again. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that various claims were submitted by the petitioner before the respondent authorities in compliance of the order passed by this Court but the respondent authorities have not properly and minutely scrutinized the claim of the petitioner and by cryptic order dated 12/02/2018, his case has been closed.

4.

I have gone through the communication dated 12/02/2018 of the Block Education Officer, Podi Uproda, District - Korba. The representation made by the petitioner was considered and has been rejected. In the rejection order, the representation of the petitioner in respect of many claims has been rejected. In some of the claims, it has been stated that the claim is not specific. Irrespective of correctness of the said order, as the authorities have considered the representation of the petitioner, it cannot be said that the respondent has not complied with the order of the Court.

5.

Giving the petitioner liberty to challenge order dated 12/02/2018 on such grounds as may be available to him under the law, this contempt petition is dismissed.

Sd/- ( Manindra Mohan Shrivastava ) Judge Deepti