Disposed

Smt. Kara Bai v. Shailbala Martin

Chhattisgarh HC11 Mar 2019CONT/705/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

, the High Court of Chhattisgarh disposed of a contempt petition by directing the respondents to ensure compliance of a previous order regarding the Employee Deposit Scheme within three months, emphasizing sincere effort beyond mere inter-office correspondence, while reserving the petitioner's right to approach the court again for non-compliance.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to make all sincere efforts to comply with the order dated 05/04/2018 within three months.

Smt. Kara Bai Vs Shailbala Martin — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Chhattisgarh HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONT No. 705 of 2018

¶4

Smt. Kara Bai W/o W/o Late Budheshwar Meri Aged About 56 Years Cleaner Raigarh, Depot. Vrs 2003, R/o Ward- 12, Bhojpur Baigin Bandhan, Champa, Police Station Champa, District Janjgir- Champa, Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

¶5

---- Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Shailbala Martin Managing Director, Madhya Pradesh. Road Transport Corporation, H. O. Habibganj, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh,Contemnor., District : Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh

¶8

---- Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr. Vivek Kumar Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Varun Sharma, Advocate.

¶10

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board

¶11

11/03/2019

¶12

The present contempt petition has been filed alleging non compliance of the order dated 05/04/2018 in passed in WPS No. 2732/2018. This Court in the said writ petition has directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner preferably within a period of two months so far as the grant of relief under Employee Deposit Scheme is concerned.

¶13

The respondents have entered appearance and filed their reply and in their reply they have categorically stated that the respondents have taken steps for compliance of the order. In the process, they have called for certain records that are available with the CIDC that is the place from where the petitioner has been superannuated.

¶14

At this juncture, counsel for the petitioner produce the order of coordinate Bench of this Court passed in a bunch of Contempt Petitions

¶15

¶16

dated 01/11/2018. Those contempt petitions were also in respect of identical set of facts. The contempt petitions were disposed off with direction to the respondents to ensure payment payable to the petitioner under Employee Deposit Scheme within a further period of three months. At the same time rights of the petitioners were reserved to approach this Court in case of non compliance of the order within a said stipulated period.

¶17

In view of the facts that in identical matters, the Co-ordinate Bench has already granted three months time to the respondents for compliance and respondents in their reply in the present Contempt Petition also has shown their eagerness for compliance of the order.

¶18

At this juncture, this Court is of the opinion that the present contempt petition also can be disposed off under similar terms. Respondents therefore are directed to ensure that the order passed by this Court on 05/04/2018 and taking note of the contents of the reply that has been filed by the respondents, they should make all efforts ensuring compliance of the order within a further period of three months starting from today. It is made clear that the respondents should make sincere efforts in ensuring that the compliance is done in letter and spirit. Mere making some correspondence from one office to another office would not show any justification for compliance, this Court would view such a stand seriously.

¶19

Accordingly, the contempt petition stands disposed off reserving the right of the petitioner to approach this Court again in case if need so arises.

¶20

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge

¶21

Rohit

Smt. Kara Bai v. Shailbala Martin

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Kara Bai v. Shailbala Martin

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Amrita Bai Vs South Eastern Coal Fields Limited

Smt. Laxmi Bai Vs State of Achhattisgarh

Yuvraj Sahu Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Neetu Vs South Eastern Coalfields Ltd.

Chandrakishore Pandey Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mayaram Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh