a^ [y^^ SingSe Bench <7 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ PetitionfS.) N0. v ' /2010 PETITIONER VERSUS RESPONDENTS ^sy' .••''.^." ^^•^•'\,-- ^'' r" / ,^/- '.'<^ ^' Sanjay SharmaS/o Late Ishwar Prasad Sharma, Aged about 44 years, R/o village Kutena- (Sakarra) Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through : Secretary Public Works Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2; Engineer in Chief Public Works Department, Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) 3. Superintending Engineer, Public Works Department Bilaspur Division, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 4. Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Bilaspur Division, District Bilaspur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER J^RTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRITJN NATURE OF MANDAMUS CERTIORARY OR ANY OTHER WRIT OF LIKE NATURE ETC. The petitioner most humbly and respectfully begs to submit as under : ^.,^. 1 XI-HC—78 ^WWl ^HTcfr 'S^ ^I^K^i'M, ®^l-H4!<o,f«l<vll^'j,< ..U...-£..c^\.^:...^e^u 200 3Tl^?T T^PF (y<t^^) 3?n^y'^1 f^ThF ^y^ff 3^sr ^Rtc^ I^HW^TfeT^I^? BB : HOM'BLE MSL JUBTICE PKJSTINKER DEWAKBR 30.08.2010 couilsel Shri Ashwaai Shukla, Shri Ajit Siagh, P.L. for the| Couusel for the petitioner (Annexure P/2) ia relation to 4< pending before the respondent would be seived if the petitione^ present petitiou with Uberty to coucenied authority for expeditiously. To fhis, counsel for the Stajfce Consideiliig the facts aiid petitioner is peroiitted to withdr^vv libertv as aforesaid. In fhe e^ representation by the petitioner it is expected fhat the saxae wifh law. It is niade clear tliat fhisl opiaion on merits of the case would be at libes-ty to decid^ accordaiice witli law, cftH(<ll<fll 'RT^lf ^T 'f^st ^^K ^^Tfim^n^T for the petitioner, State. \A (ubmits tliat his representation |ompassionate appomtineiit is JN0.4 aiid the e-nds of. justice is permitted to withdi-aw the -[|iirsue his grievan.ee before the d^cidm.g his , representation has no objection. lcircunistances of the ca.se, the ftie present petition with fhe ^entaality of Iffiiig any suc'h fcefore the conccraed aufhority, wduld be decided iii accordaiice Court has not expressed aay laad the aiitliority concenied th.e appticatiou strictly ia, Sd/- pritinker Diwaker judge