The High Court disposed of a contempt petition alleging non-compliance with a prior order. The court held that the respondents evaluated the claim and issued an order rejecting it; the propriety of that rejection lies within writ jurisdiction, not contempt jurisdiction.
The Contempt Petition stood disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
-1-
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CONT No. 264 of 2019
| V | ersus | ---- Applicant | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. H. N. Hiradhar | District | Education Officer, | District Bilaspur, |
| Chhattisgarh | ---Respondent | ||
| For Applicant | : | Mr. Varun Sharma, | Advocate. |
| For Respondent | : | Mr. Mayank Kumar Dhiraj Ku. Wankhe |
on behalf of Mr. de, Advocate. |
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board
14/05/2019
-2-
so far as the direction given by the respondents stands duly complied with. Whether the findings by the respondents in their order dated 05.11.2018 is proper, legal and justified or not ? Is one which could be decided by this Court only under the writ jurisdiction and cannot be looked into under the contempt jurisdiction.
Sd/-
(P. Sam Koshy) Judge
Rahul
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the rejection of the petitioner's claim for advance increments by the respondent falls under contempt jurisdiction or must be challenged under writ jurisdiction.
Pravin Mishra
H. N. Hiradhar
P. Sam Koshy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
