Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 57197 (CHH)

SMT. LAXMI JAISAWAL v. SMT. NIHARIKA BARIK SINGH

CONT/720/2025 · 2025-12-08

Shri Narendra Kumar Vyas

Contempt Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:59622 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONT No. 720 of 2025 1. Smt. Laxmi Jaisawal W/o Bharat Bhushan Jaisawal Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Purgaon, Police Station Bilaigarh, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara C.G. ... Applicant versus 1. Smt. Niharika Barik Singh Principal Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 2. L.P. Patel District Education Officer, District- Raigarh (Now Sarangarh) C.G. 3. Dr. Sanjay Kannoje, Collector Sarangarh District Sarangarh C.G. 4. R.L. Koshle Sarangarh Block Education Officer Sarangarh District Sarangarh (C.G.) 5. Radheshyam Nayak Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Sarangarh District Sarangarh (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pawan Kesharwani, Advocate For Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Animesh Tiwari, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 09.12.2025 1. The petitioner has filed the present contempt petition under Section 12 of the Contempt of Court Act read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India against non-compliance of the order dated 29.08.2023 (Annexure C/1) passed by this Court in WP(S) No. 694/2015 by the respondents. MANISH YADAV Digitally signed by MANISH YADAV Date: 2025.12.10 11:02:14 +0530 2 2. The respondents in pursuance of the order passed by this Court have already been reinstated the petitioner in service and has also paid back wages to the tune of Rs. 6,01,925/-, as such, the order has been complied with. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that even after no reinstatement no salary has been paid and even according to him on a lower side the back wages has been computed. 4. Since the order has already been complied, nothing is required to be adjudicated by this Court at this juncture. However, the petitioner is at liberty to take recourse available to him under the law. 5. With aforesaid observation, the contempt petition is disposed of granting liberty in favour of the petitioner. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Manish