p^@- e3 c SL THE lONOURABL.E.C^HHATTISOARH mGH__COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR. W.P..NO, 2-3 25^/2003 PE-riTIOKBR Ashok Kumar Tiwari S/o Tulsi Ran Tiwari aged about 42 years, R/O Sayapsra Banetara Pollce Station BQ'netars, Distt. Durg (c.0.5 VERSUS RSPOND2NTS -^^ %^^- ^c§3^' ^ &»v 1« State of. Chhattisgarh; Through The Collector Durg, Disfct.-Durg ( C. G. ) 2» District EBecutive Magistrate, Durg, District-Durg (c«0.) 3. Suprintendaat of Police Durg Distt. Durg (c.G.5 4« Station ttouse Officer police Statlon Banetara Distt. Durg( c. G) n-RJ:T_ PETITION UND^_&RTICL£__2267227__CpUNSTITUTION OF INDIA IT MAY PLEASE MY. fcORD : %^ XI-HC-22 ••3"^ '•^HM'i, d^y'lio, I'Kii'Hy Wrst' Pettion ofthsconstitu{!onof 3-tl.fc, .-(^i .yk^^. .&rP/'^-2-32-?y Wfn^^'T.i.wss^ ... aSiSt&'^'-• ^' ^•ef^'e-yi :UWi''.i^ t^» 311^1 ^il R:.-li+ 311^1 ^1H ^f^{ 25.08.03 sn^('FRiiwofOT Shri K.K.Naik., counsel for the petitioner. Stei Sanjay K. Agrawal,] Deputy Advocate General for the State/respondents. Heard. Learned cauasel for thel resoondents siibmits that thej Impugned order passed by the| District Magistrate, Durg, is aooealable^6^<"the State Government under Section 9 of the Madhya pradesh Rajya f Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990. Since in this case efficaclous and effectiye slternative reraedy 1s availa): to the petitioner he should have exhaustsd his remedy first. but without availing that remedy, the petitioner has filed this -oetition directly to this Court. <=ht<^'iftTT *iW<^ ^ 'fe'St ^.^lt^K ^; srfigii sii^l dra\ nsa l&tf Lef. pr&c pre'; COll ond itn on. , A • '-//vP C^>f ^/K 3Tl^rqiT 1^:iNr3TI^I aTtiwgftg SS^! <^a°h ( >4<=ttyttT) SII^fTCffW^fe Therefore, I am of exhausting the alternatitj oetition cannot be allow^ is dismissed. Consequently. M.(Wj 7175/2003 stand disposed '^l^f^NN ^WV^ ^ fs^ <Fq'<^K ^aiPaHsn^i e r :d. ^h^ r J ^ii. Accordingly, the petition P.NQ.2131/2003 and I c. ^T^ e ±'i.U> a SST-