0@^r'/? c'. i-:'":^.":^r";i;:2- ^ ,....-."":<'>'^ .'...;-I"^-;t"?-£^^ p-^NO:::::;;"s^)yA"':':';:^...' p,,.s^6d^("j?..L^.^---"""" da^..--^' C^: IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHAHISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) N0. 6°)^ / 2009 IN THE MAHER OF: PETITIONER Gulab Chandra Agrawal, S/o Shri G.R. Agrawal, Aged about 55 years, Advocate by profession, R/o State Bank Road, Pendra, Tehsil- Pendra Road, District- Bilaspur State of Chhattisgarh, Through its Deputy Secretary, Department of Law, Justice and Legal Affairs D.K.S. Bhavan, Secretariat Raipur, Chhattisgarh WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTJON OF INDiA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT, DIRECTION OR ORDER IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR CERTIORARI VERSUS RESPONDENT ^? HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR PETITIONER RESPONDENT WRIT PETITION (C) N0.6916 OF 2009 Gulab Chandra Agrawal Versus Stateof Chhattisgarh (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Ankit Singhal, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri A.S. Kachhawaha, Dy. Advocate General for the State/respondent. ORDER(ORAL) (Passed on this 18th dayofJune, 2010) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the impugned order dated 14/9/2009 (Annexure P-1) and 24/10/2009 (Annexure P-2) have been passed without assigning any reasons. The dispute involved in the present case is squarely covered by the order dated 16/11/2009 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 5363/09 (Mahanand Mishra Vs. State of C.G. & Others). 2. Shri Kachhawaha, learned Dy. Advocate General appearing for the respondent submits that the present case may also be disposed of in terms of the order passed in Mahanand Mishra (supra). 3. In view of foregoing, having regard to the submission of the learned counsel for the parties, it appears that the present petition is similar to that of Mahanand Mishra (supra). Accordingly the petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 14/9/2009 (Annexure P-1) and 24/10/2009 (Annexure P-2) stand quashed and the State/ respondent is directed to consider the case of the petitioner on its own merits, in accordance with law and pass appropriate order. ashok Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge