Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 43833 (CHH)

KALESHWAR v. TULARAM BHARADWAJ

CONT/1433/2024 · 2025-01-21

Shri Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi

Contempt Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:3645 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONT No. 1433 of 2024 1 - Kaleshwar S/o Punaram Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Jurali, Tahsil Pondiuproda District - Korba, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Firat Singh S/o Guha Ram Aged About 58 Years R/o Village Jurali, Tahsil Pondiuproda District - Korba, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Malesh Kumar S/o Aadhar Ram Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Jurali, Tahsil Pondiuproda District - Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicants versus 1 - Tularam Bharadwaj Land Acquisition And Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Pondiuproda, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 2 - S.L. Dwivedi, Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause title, as taken from CIS) For Applicants : Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi ) Order on Board 21/01/2025 1. Heard. 2. This Contempt petition has been preferred by applicants under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for non-compliance of the order dated 01.8.2024 (Annexure-C/1) passed in WPC No.3906/2024. 2 3. On 01.8.2024 in WPC No.3906/2024, this Court has passed following order in para 5 & 6, which reads as under:- “5. Considering the submission of counsel for petitioner as also the documents placed on record, in particular Annexure-P/2, which is a letter written by Sub- Divisional Officer/Land Acquisition Officer on 24.1.2024 addressing to respondent No.4 for depositing the amount of compensation according to the amended calculation-sheet, the writ petition at this stage, is disposed off directing respondent No.4 to deposit the amount as per amended computation of award by the competent authority expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order. 6. Certified copy as per rules.” 4. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that vide order dated 22.12.2023, Land Acquisition, Resettlement and Rehabilitation Tribunal, Chhattisgarh (henceforth referred as “Tribunal”) had passed the order in favour of the applicants for payment of enhanced compensation. Thereafter, Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue)/Land Acquisition Officer/respondent no.1 herein had written letter dated 24.1.2024 to Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department/respondent no.2 herein for depositing the enhanced amount of compensation, but the same was not deposited by respondent No.2 herein, therefore, applicants and other petitioners of that petition filed Writ Petition (C) No.3906/2024, in which, despite clear direction issued by this Court to comply with the communication dated 24.1.2024 made by respondent no.1 herein within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order, despite that, respondent 3 no.2 herein did not comply with the order, hence, applicants herein have filed contempt petition. He would further submit that since the order under contempt has not been complied with by respondents, therefore, contempt proceeding may be drawn against them. 5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that the order dated 22.12.2023 for enhancement of compensation passed by the Tribunal, has been challenged before the High Court by respondents by filing First Appeal No.2/2025. He would further submit that since recourse to law has been taken against the order of enhancement, therefore, this contempt proceeding may be dropped. 6. In reply, learned counsel for the applicants further submitted that the respondents filed aforesaid appeal after filing instant contempt petition, which shows their malafide intention. 7. Having considered aforesaid contentions of learned counsel for both the parties, though it is found that the order under contempt has not been complied with by respondents well within a time, but by filing FA No.2/2025 against the order dated 22.12.2023 passed by the Tribunal, they have taken recourse to law, as such, no case of contempt is made out at this stage. 8. Accordingly, the rule issued to respondents is discharged and contempt proceeding is dropped. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Rukhsar RUKHSAR BANO Digitally signed by RUKHSAR BANO Date: 2025.01.22 16:07:43 +0530