i'l^t.lX yCs.giu';'! /[ ' 7 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (C.G.) PETITIONER i W.P. N 5g|2y2005 Naval KishoreMishra S/o Shri Ambika Prasad Mishra Aged about'59 years, Time Keeper Water Resources Department Pendra Road, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS / \3c'...'-'^""f'^ .-~v<*-' ^ ^.^y^./ '••<^^/' ^97 ".s^ -eC /' 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary General Administration Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) ,,2. State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretaiy, Irrigation Department D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) ^3. Engineer in Chief Water Resources Department of Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.) /4. Chief Engineer Hasdeo Kachhar Water Resources Department, Bilaspur, (C.G.) fer / 5. Superintendent Engineer, Manyari Hasdeo division, Bilaspur, (C.G.) , 6. Executive Engineer Water Resources Division, Pendra Road, District Bilaspur, (C.G.) S£S^3SS^ ^^:^I^i%^ ^•=-^^^''®?;'i.! jETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRITS OF MANDAMUS AND PRTIORARI AND FOR OTHER SUITABLE WRITS AND DIRECTIONS: IP-^'^-^.; iSiSSiSSi ^^^IJ T^.'^@,:j^B 'ARTtCJUI-ARS-OE-'cnn-— r BB w t? HiGH GOURT OF CHHATTiSGARH : B!LA3PUR ^ F •'tK fRIT PETmON N0.5812:OF 2005 Naval Kishore Fviishra Versus State of Chhattisaam & Others petition under Artlcle 22-3 of the Gonstitution of India') Slngle Bench : Hon'bte Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, ,J. Pressnt:- PETiTIONER RESPONDENTS Shri JltendraPaii, Advocaieror the petiti' Shri M.P.S. Bhatia, Dy. Govt. Advocate forthe State. ORDER (ORAU . (Passed on this 23r° day of February, 2010) 1) Leamed counsei appearing for the petitioner, on instructions, submjts that ihe petitioner does not want to press this matter on merits, however, the petitioner may be permitted to make a repressntetion to cohsider his case in the ijght of some cireuiars issued eariier. 2') Learned eounsel appearing for the State submits that in the event, the petitioner makes a representation, the same wlll be considered and decided, in accordance with law, within a period of three months froffl .ihe date of receipt of the representation. 3) In view offoregoing, according to the iearned counset appearing for the petitioner, nothing survives in this petition for adjudlcation. . 4) Accordingly, the writ pefition is disposed qf. Gowri Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge (ll(