1 2026:CGHC:24005 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONT No. 353 of 2026 Ku. Vakta Gedam D/o Late Jeevan Lal Gedam Aged About 39 Years R/o Village And Post Shahvada, Distt. Kanker, Chhattisgarh. Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - Ms. Niharika Barik Chief Secretary Panchayat And Rural Development Department. At Present In Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya New Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Shri Virendra Kumar Jaiswal Addl. Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department. At Present In Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya New Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. K.N. Nande, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr Yogendra Pandey, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru Order on Board 16/06/2026 1. The present contempt petition has been filed under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, alleging non-compliance of the order dated 03.07.2025 passed by this Court in WPS No. 6193 of 2025. The grievance of the RAHUL JHA Digitally signed by RAHUL JHA Date: 2026.06.16 16:32:55 +0530 2 petitioner is that despite the direction issued by this Court, the appeal preferred by him, which had been pending since 29.08.2022, was not decided. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has filed a covering memo dated 11.06.2026 and submits that in compliance with the order dated 03.07.2025 passed in WPS No. 6193 of 2025, the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been considered and disposed of vide order dated 28.04.2026. It is further submitted that in terms of Rule 3 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam (Appeal and Review) Rules, 1995, the Divisional Commissioner is the competent appellate authority to consider an appeal against an order passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat. Accordingly, while disposing of the appeal, a direction has been issued to the Divisional Commissioner to decide the same within a period of three months. 3. Having considered the submissions advanced and upon perusal of the order dated 28.04.2026, this Court finds that the authority before whom the appeal was pending has taken a decision in the matter and has directed the competent appellate authority, namely the Divisional Commissioner, to adjudicate the appeal within the stipulated period. Thus, the direction issued by this Court in WPS No. 6193 of 2025 stands substantially complied with. 4. In view of the aforesaid compliance, this Court is of the considered opinion that no case of wilful or deliberate disobedience of the order dated 03.07.2025 is made out so as to warrant continuation of the present 3 contempt proceedings. 5. Consequently, the contempt petition stands disposed of. The rule is discharged. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Rahul