1 / 3 2026:CGHC:542 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONT No. 1159 of 2025 • Dayanand Jayaswal S/o Shri Ramesh Jayaswal Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Semaria, Post Nardala, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1. Dr. S. Bharthidasan Secretary, Skill Development, Training And Technical Education And Employment Department, Chamber No. 52/3, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. Shri Vijay Dayanad K- Director Directorate of Employment and Training, Indrawati Bhawan, Block- 4 First Floor, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Syed Majid Ali, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. R.S. Marhas, Addl. Adv. General with Ms. Anushka Sharma, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 06/01/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this contempt petition alleging willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in WPS No. 8992/2023 dated 18.02.2025. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that co-ordinate Bench of this Court while considering bunch of writ petitions allowed all the writ petitions with an observation made in body of the order. Allowing the writ petition would mean that petitioners were entitled for appointment, however, respondents have arbitrarily in willful disobedience of the order Annexure C-1 dated 18.02.2025 has rejected the claim of petitioners for employment for the post of Training Officer in the department of Skill Development. PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA 2 / 3 3. Learned counsel for respondents would submit that respondents are duty bound to comply with the order passed by this Court in its words and spirit. He submits that in the operative portion of the order alleged to have been violated, there is only direction to consider and decide the claim of each of petitioner and to pass appropriate orders in respect of each of the petitioner. After receiving the order along with covering letter, respondents authorities have considered and taken decision on 25.11.2025 with respect to petitioner and intimated to it and the claim of petitioner has been rejected with detailed order. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents enclosed along with contempt petition. 5. Operative portion of the order passed in WPS No. 8992/2023 dated 18.02.2025 is extracted below for ready reference: “12. In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioners were succeeded in raising their claim. Accordingly, all the writ petitions are hereby allowed. The respondent authorities are directed to consider and decide the claim of each of the petitioners and to pass appropriate orders in respect of each of the petitioners within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.” 6. While allowing the writ petition, the writ court has issued direction to the authorities to consider and decide claim of each of petitioner and to pass appropriate orders. Respondents have passed an order on 25.11.2025 rejecting claim of petitioner. 7. In the aforementioned facts of the case and considering the operative portion of the order and the direction issued by writ court, is to consider and decide claim of petitioner and to pass appropriate orders, which in the opinion of this Court, respondents authorities have complied with the direction issued by this Court. If petitioner in any manner is aggrieved with the correctness of 3 / 3 the decision of respondents, he is having efficacious alternate remedy under the law. 8. For the foregoing discussion, this contempt proceedings stands dropped. Notice issued to respondents stands discharged. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) pwn JUDGE