High Court Of ChhattisgarhCONT/825/2021dismissed

Anil Joshi v. Mr. T.K. Verma

2021-10-29Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CONT No. 825 of 2021 Anil Joshi S/o Late Shri R. D. Joshi, Aged About 60 Years, Assistant Food Officer, Mahasamund, Resident Of House No. S/13, Priyadarshani Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Mr. T.K. Verma, Secretary, Food Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Mr. Manoj Soni, Additional Secratary, Directorate Of Food Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Mr. Doman Singh, Collector, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

4. Mr. Nitish Trivedi, Food Officer, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Amit Buxy, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 29.10.2021

1. The present petition has been filed seeking for initiating contempt proceedings against the respondents for non-compliance of the order dated 08.09.2021 passed by this Court in WPS No. 4722/2021.

2. This Court while passing the interim order had made it specific that the interim order would come into force subject to the petitioner not being relieved.

3. Today, when the matter is taken up, learned counsel for petitioner fairly concedes that the record shows that the petitioner had already been relieved on 31.08.2021. However, counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner was on leave during the said period and therefore the relieving could not have been physically effected upon the petitioner.

4. The said ground raised by the counsel for petitioner may not be acceptable for the reason that this Court while passing the impugned order had already provided a rider to the respondents. Under the circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that no contempt as such is made out against the respondents.

5. The contempt petition accordingly stands rejected. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to avail appropriate remedies before the writ court itself.

Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge Khatai