CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Conterupt Petition. No /2005 •<^~? v. CONTEMNORS ^•1)

Raipur (C.G.) Sri Subodh Singh Aged about 48 years Director, Veterinary Health Services, Opp. Ghasidas Mahant Granfhailay, Near CoUector Office, Raipur, Distt- Raipur (C.G.) Sri D.k.Siyar Aged about 50 years, The Joint Director, Veterinaiy Healfh Services, 1st Floor, Composite Building, Opp. CoUectorate Bilaspur District- BUaspur (C.G.) !nm"iHii'a'im'''i Contenapt petition U/s 12 contenipt"6f Court Act Read with article 215 of Constitution oflndia ^ '3CTIT^iy(<?Wr,®^OT^.f^RTOy wrar ^iTf^:"-&lfc.^.2< Wl 200 311^91 (raq?(^qfgq^) aii^rwf^te Bwaii^rwite yCT(R^lli(T'3n^CT •<'wfri<i1-i <ii<wT^fe><Sl tKi^ii ^3i)^H3n^?r •Vl DIVISION BENCH HON'BLE SHRI A.K. PATNAJK, CJ. HO B!.ESHjRISUNIL^^^^ ;26.<)9-2005. Cont, Petit(onNo.76fef2005. t-teard Mr.Gautam Bh^iduri, learned counset for the applicant and Mr. V.R. Tiwari, learned coun^el for the Contemnors. This is a contempt peftion in which the petitioner. comptained of t^3J> ,< :ei \d \/ i!

13 tllE e,S» willful violation of the directiod of this Court in the order dated 06-05-2005 in W.P. No. 1518 of 2004 t^ consider the claim of the petitioner for his salary in accordance with th^ relevant rules and pass appropriate orders and communicate such ord^rs to the petitioner within a period of one month ignoring the order ofstispension that we have quashed. It appears from the|return filed by the respondents that after considering the said claim ^f the petitioner, Oeputy Director, Veterinary Service, Korba sent a comr|)unication dated 31.08.2005 to the petitioner along with a Demand Draf( for Rs.1,95.829/- towards the dues of the petitioner towards his sataryj The case of the petjtioner is that the said sum of Rs.1,95.829/- does not represent the actu^l dues of the petitioner towards his salary for the relevant peripd. His ca^e is that he has been working at Bilaspur and only for part oftheperiod hi^ salary has been paid.

A civil contempt has| been defined under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 as willful disobecfience of the order passed by this Court. The order passed by this Court |n W.P. No.1518 of 2004 on 06.05.2005 was a direction to the respondent^ to consitier the claim of the petitioner for his salary in accordance with t^ie relevant rules and pass appropriate ortfers !SfeIS 3P'FS/2005-20,000 ^ ycq»«f<4|rt^UT¥l<-|!l|g, Rdl^y<< •imwjew €^..^:..^l.('/.^., ^1^200 3ntST'raip(>}crf3Ei5) s^iKR^f^ran^T •2-- qiiirnjll 11<1oV^"fel^l'(R|+<;l'( ^srf^rsn^^ and communicate such ordi ^rs to the petitioner within a period of one ^uspension that was quashed. The claim of month ignoring the order of ji/e been considered by the respondents but the petitioner appears to hs^ only an amount of Rs.1 ,95,8|29/- has been paid. Hence, the order dated [Court in W.P. No. 1518 of 2004 appears to 06-05-2005 passed by this ferely, because the full claim of the peUtioner have been complied with. h the respondents, we cannot hold that has not been granted by respondents have committi sd willful disobedience of the order dated In case, the pe|titioner is of the view that some more amount the petitioner is to file a :o lodge a claim before the appropriate forum is due towards his salary, s^propriate course- writ petition in this Court or for decision in accordance w| th law. 06/05/2005. With the aforesaid )bservations, the contempt pefition stands disposed of. Parties are entitted f<* certified copy of this order. Sd/- Chief Justice fl \ _ Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge fl 1!"' 3ii^?rwR-ii<h awsn^aipqw r^ ^ .Ur. ^^il 1