High Court Of ChhattisgarhCONT/33/2017disposed off

Fekuram Suryawansi v. Ganesh Shankar Mishra

2017-01-19Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CONT No. 33 of 2017 • Fekuram Suryawansi S/o Ghanaram Suryawansi, Aged About 67 Years R/o Bharari, Post Singhari, Tah. & Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

1. Ganesh Shankar Mishra Secretary Irrigation Dept. Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Mantralaya Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. P.K.Das, Accountant General, Pagariya Complex, Pandari Raipur, Chhattisgarh ................(Contemnors) ---- Respondents And CONT No. 479 Of 2016 • Lakhanlal Sahu S/o Dukalu Ram Sahu, Aged About 66 Years R/o Durga Talior Front Of L.I.C. Office Champa Thana Champa, District JanjgirChampa, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant Vs

1. Ganesh Shankar Mishra Secretary Irrigation Dept. Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Mantralaya Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. B.K.Mohanty, Accountant General, Pagariya Complex, Pandari Raipur, Chhattisgarh ................(Contemnors) ---- Respondents For Applicants :

Shri KPS Gandhi, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 19/01/2017

1. These contempt petitions have been preferred alleging non-compliance of

the order passed by this Court in WPS Nos.3464 of 2015 and WPS No.3238/2015, by which, the orders passed by the Division Bench on 26.02.2015 in WA No.281/2013 and other connected appeals and in Review Petition No.61/2015 were made applicable to the petitioners' case and a direction was issued to the respondents to decide the petitioners' representations regarding pension of the employees of work charged and contingency paid establishment depending upon and after the outcome of Review Petition No.61/2015.

2. It is informed that as against the order passed in WA No.281/2013 read with the order passed in Review Petition No.61/2015, the State has preferred SLP(C) Nos.11541-11550 of 2016, which are pending consideration.

3. In view of the fact that the SLPs are pending, it may not be appropriate for this Court to initiate contempt proceedings at this stage.

4. Accordingly, both the contempt petitions are disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to move again if the competent authority of the State Government does not decide the representations within a period of 03 months from the date final order is passed in the above mentioned SLPs. Sd/- Judge (Prashant Kumar Mishra) ashu