Narsingh Markam And ANR. v. Shri Santosh Mishra
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
AT BILASPUR.
3mm §g§m Contempt Case (C) N0.
g 3 3 Of 2013 'PETITIONERS :1) Narsingh Markam, S/o.
Shri Lalu / Ram Markam, aged about years, Occupation Service on Collector Rate (Peon) presently posted in the Narayanpur . Jan Shakti Niyojan Vibhag Women Industrial Training Institute Narayanpur, Post and Police Station Narayanpur, Revenue District Narayanpur and Civil District Jagdalpur (C.G.) PIN 494661 :2) VyvSmt.
.Champavati Nag, W/o.
/ Bansh1 Lal Nag, aged bout 4O X years, Occupation Service on Collector Rate (Peon cum-cook man) presently posted in the Narayanpur Jan Shakti Niyojan Vibhag Women Industrial Training Institute, Narayanpur, Post and Police Station Narayanpur, Revenue District Narayanpur and r Civil District Jagdalpur (C.G.) PIN 494661
Versus
CONTEMNOR :
Shri Santosh Mishra, Joint Respondent a» Director, Industrial Training Institute, Bairon Bazar Post Bairon Bazar, Police Station Civil Line, Raipur (C.G.) CONTEMPT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 'OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT FOR INITIATING OF CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE CONTEMNOR/ RESPONDENT FOR WILFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER DATED 01-08-2013 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT IN W.P.(S) No.2232 of 2013 (ANNEXURE C-1). / 6w ua/kakw ri:.:1¢y
V2) HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Contempt Case (C) No.583 of 2013 1.
Narsingh Markam Petitioners 2.
Smt.Champavati Nag
Versus
Respondent Shri Santosh Mishra (Contempt Petition under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act) i Mr.S.P.Sahu, counsel for the petitioners.
(SB:
Hon'ble Mr. T.P. Sharma, J.)
ORDER
(1 -1 -2014) 1.
By this contempt case the petitioners have prayed for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent for wiiiful disobedience of the order dated 1.8.2013 passed in W.P. (S) No.2232 of 2013. 2.
i have heard Iearned counsel for the petitioners, perused the petition « and documents appended thereto.
3.
in absence of any material to show the inaction of the respondent, the contempt case is dismissed summarily reserving Iiberty to the petitioners to file afresh if cause survives along with material showing the inaction of the respondent, especially in the era of Right to Information Act.
Sd/- T. P. Sharma Judge