1 2026:CGHC:16681 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONT No. 1403 of 2025 1 - Uttam Prasad Paikra S/o Shri Arjun Singh Aged About 61 Years Working On The Post Of Forest Sub Divisional Officer, Janakpur, Division Manendragarh, Dist. - Manendragadh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner Versus 1 - Shri Manish Kashyap Divisional Forest Officer, Manendragarh Division, Dist. - Manendragadh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Deepak Kaushik, Advocate on behalf of Mr. J.P. Shukla, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Shantam Awasthi, Advocate SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 10/04/2026 1. This contempt petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 r/w. Article 215 of the Constitution of India alleging non-compliance of the order dated 21.07.2025 and 27.05.2025 passed by this Court in WP(S) No. 8040/2025 and MCC No. 751/2025 respectively. 2. The main thrust of the petitioner in this contempt petition is that even after getting the knowledge that this Court has passed the order for maintaining the status quo in favour of the petitioner, the respondent/contemnor had 2 issued an order dated 04.08.2025 relieving the petitioner from his present place of posting and thereby,committed contempt of the order passed in WP(S) No. 8040/2025 and MCC No. 751/2025. 3. Learned counsel for the Respondent submits that the Respondent is tendering his unconditional apology. The mistake in issuing the letter dated 04.08.2025 is inadvertent and not deliberate. The corrective orders have already been passed on 19.08.2025 immediately after getting the knowledge about the order of this Court. Vide letter dated 19.08.2025 (Annexure R/1), the letter/order dated 14.08.2025 has been canceled with which, petitioner is aggrieved and have filed this contempt petition and further directed to maintain status quo in compliance of the order of High Court. 4. Learned counsel for the Respondents also submit that in the order passed in the writ petition as also, the MCC, direction was to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner. The Committee considering the representation has recommended to cancel the order of transfer of the petitioner, however, the said order of cancellation of transfer of the petitioner was put to challenge in WP (S) No. 11502/2025 by one Laxmi Narayan Thakur who was posted in place of the petitioner and vide order dated 19.03.2026, the order dated 22.09.2025 canceling the order of transfer of the petitioner was quashed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents enclosed along with the contempt petition. 6. In view of the submissions made by counsel for the parties and further considering that the Respondent has issued letter dated 19.08.2025 canceling the order/letter dated 14.08.2025, in the facts and circumstances of the case (the letter which made the petitioner to file this contempt petition) and further considering that the Respondent has tendered apology for the inadvertent mistake occurred in issuing the letter dated 04.08.2025, I do not find any good ground to continue this contempt petition. 3 7. Accordingly, the contempt proceedings initiated against the respondents is dropped. Contempt petition is closed. 8. Notices issued to the respondents stands discharged. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Dey SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY