1.....
Cont. Case No.1110 of 2009
M.P.Rajasav Nirishak (RI)Sangh Shri Vinod Kumar
7.01.2011
Shri Vijay Shukla, Counsel for the applicant.
Shri Nishant Namdeo, Counsel for the respondent.
This application is filed for initiating contempt proceedings
against the respondent alleging non-compliance of order dated
22.7.2009 by which the State Government was directed to
decide the representation of the applicant against the transfer
order.
The grievance of the petitioner is that though the State
Government was directed to decide the representation but
without any authorisation from the Government, respondent
himself decided the representation. This has caused reasons to
the applicant to file this application.
During the course of the arguments, applicant submitted
that after filing of this contempt application, the State
Government has decided the representation of the applicant and
rejected the same, which order has already been challenged by
the applicant by filing separate petition.
Considering the fact that the State Government has
decided the representation of the applicant as per the order
dated 22.7.2009, nothing survives in this application. Apart
from this, if the respondent was not authorised to decide the
representation and had decided the same by misconstruing the
order, no case is made out for initiating the contempt
proceedings. In view of the aforesaid, no case is made out for
initiating contempt proceedings.
However, applicant if advised so may raise its
contentions before the writ Court where the applicant
2…..
Cont. Case No.1110 of 2009
M.P.Rajasav Nirishak (RI)Sangh Shri Vinod Kumar
7.01.2011
has challenged the order of the State Government.
With the aforesaid liberty, the proceedings are closed with
no order as to costs.
(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (G.D. Saxena)
JUDGE JUDGE
vj