w- -<S? SRI" co riiTr"']"rae^ 'v ^•}v IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR fCHHATnSGARHI WRIT PETITION fS)NO. g^ OF 2007 PETITIONER (^' t£> v?-'"-^-.^'.' >0-?fe\^ yw^' ;<i'*. RESPONDENTS / ^ ^ Mst. Jashina Begum Widow of Late Amiruddin Ansari, aged about 31 years, Resident of Jamtipara (Kewra) Village Panchayat Kewara, Janpad Panchayat Pratappur, District Surguja (C.G.). VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through: The Secretary, Department of Women and Child Development, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.). 2. The Collector, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.). .GO^ <sr^^v^ y :^w s-n^'^ ^ ,^-* ^4^ > ^ / ,3. The District Programme Officer, Woman and Child Development, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.). 4. The Project Officer, Women and Child Development, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.). 5. The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Pratappur, District Surguja (C.G.). *««„ •3i3 NOiTiaiRoyd^iywoiiyaD "snN^aNviAi jo aynivN SHI NI iraM =10 33Nvnssi yod VIQNI do NOIiniIlSN03 3H1 JO 9ZZ 313IiyV yaoNn NOiiiiad iraM •(•3-3) efn6jns PUISIQ 'jnddeiejd leAe^oued peduer 'GJMSX leAeq^ued s6e||!A '(BJMSX) puepejLjeg j0 luapissy 'iedos UL|S jo sjiM eA!}eujsi>| •}LUS 'L^ '('S'J) efnBjns PUISIQ 'jnddeiejd ieAeq3ued peduef 'ejM3» }eAei|3ued B6e||!A 'yDuedjes 341 : L|6noJ4i 'ejMax ieAeL|3ued , 96e||!A "9' ^^;*s^; ^Sf-. .:•.<:;.••;w^'ss;^S^^^^S^:^:S^^^S^^^^^S^S^^SSS^SSS^m-3S HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR V.P. No.810of2007 Petitioner Mst. Ja.shina Eiegum. Versus Respondents Stete ofChhattisgarh aud otticrs 1B: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satlsli K. Agnihotri, J Shri V. K. Pandey, Advocate fbr the petitioner. Miss Deepali Pandey, Panel lawyer for the respondents No.l to4. ORDER (Psssed on this 12& day ofFebniaiy, 2007) 1. Leamed counsel appearmg for fhe petitioner submits fhat the petitioner has not availed the altemative remedy of appeal under Rufe 3 (b) ofthe M. P. Ftoichayats (Appeal aad Revision) Rules, 1995. The petitioner seeks pennission of this Court to wifhdraw the petition with Uberty to avail fhe statutoiv remedy. 2. It is ordercd accordingty. 3. The petition is dismissed as wifhdrawa with the above stated liberty. No orrfer as to costs. ——-- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge Thakur