Ashok Kumar Chandrakar v. Satish Kumar Pandey

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONT No. 831 of 2019

1. Ashok Kumar Chandrakar, S/o Shri S.P. Chandrakar, Aged About 55 Years, Block Education Officer, Block-Podiuproda, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

1. Satish Kumar Pandey, District Education Officer- Korba, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh

2. Lokpal Singh Jogi, Principal Higher Secondary School, Machadoli, Block-Podiuproda, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ---Respondents For Applicant :

Mr. A.S. Rajput, Advocate For Respondents :

Smt. Sunita Jain, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 13.11.2019

1. The present Contempt Petition has been filed alleging non-compliance of the Order dated 30.08.2019 passed in WPS No. 6682 of 2019 by this Court.

2. In the light of the reply and the document annexed by the State Government in the Review Petition No. 1852 of 2019, whereby they have brought a document dated 08.11.2019, whereby the representation of the petitioner has since been rejected and the transfer order dated 22.08.2019 so far as the applicant is concerned has since been modified and he has been transferred to a different place as a Principal of Higher Secondary School is concerned. This

-2Court is of the opinion that the order passed by this Court stands complied with.

3. Shri A.S. Rajput, counsel at this juncture submits that the petitioner has been deprived of discharging his duties as a B.E.O., BlockPodiuproda, District: Korba and which amounts to contempt, particularly in the light of the interim order granted by this Court on 30.08.2019 in WPS No. 6682 of 2019. However, from the reply that the State Government has filed in the aforementioned review petition, it clearly reflects that the petitioner has been permitted to remain at the place where he was posted prior to 22.08.2019 and he has also been paid salary till 08.11.2019 at the said place.

4. The contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that he has not been permitted to discharge his duties is of no consequence and the petitioner has been permitted to remain at the same place and he has also been paid his salary.

5. Given the said facts, this Court is of the opinion that the present review petition has also become inconsequential and the same deserves to be and is accordingly disposed-off and the respondents stand discharged of the contempt proceedings.

6. Accordingly, the contempt petition stands disposed-off. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rahul