t^y~ V^-o ^^ Sgj< IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0. ^SO'^-OF 2009 PETITIONER : .^> ^'.^. ...«*,..•" ^^y' ">"" .••*^' RESPONDENTS ^^^^'^^^ ^..-^ ^M S.C. Mishra, S/o Late B.B. Mishra, aged about 63 years, ^yi^" Retired as Professor, CMD PG Collect, Bilaspur, R/o C-12, Kranti Nagar, Lane No.R-5, In front of Jain Mandir, Bilaspur (CG). Versus l/ State of Chhattisgarh, Thro. The Secretary, Department of Higher Education, D.K.S. Building, Mantralaya, Raipur (CG). v^ 2. The Commissioner, Deptt. of Higher Education, Govt. Science College Premises, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) .€" 3. Director, Department of Higher Education, State of Chhattisgarh, Raipur (CG) 4. The Principal, C.M.D. College, Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) 5. Chairman, Managing Committee, C.M.D. College, Bilaspur (CG). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ?-78y 3^1 ^T f<^ich 'cl^n 3TT^T SD^W -^- \ ~s^( ^i^iKrt^ ^ti1^^<o, f®i<ni<H^< KINdl <hDi«,--W-'-^&)..-A.^.2^200'1) ^TT^?iTr^^' (i?f^^) IF^TOT TTf^T 3H^T SB s HON'BLE.SHRIJUST£CE_Pg 24.07.2009 Shri B.D.Guru, counsel for Shri Yashwant Singh T'hak-i P.L, fortheState. Contention of. the couns] petifcioner, who was working as P| has retired after sei-ving about' 3^ petitioner is entitled for leave encj ho.s not been given to him despite| According, to counsel for covered -with the judgment of tl'| Raja&than Vs. Seniar Higher & Qthers (2005 (10) SCC 346; ^ judgment, the petitioner may be| petifcion with liberty to file repre| further submitted that directio,n deciding the representation of the| Learned counsel^for the ^ representation is being made by t] the same is being decided in acccj that the representation SQ made ^j law. Accordingiy, fche petition i| liberty as aforesaid. .In the eventi.j representation vv'ithin a period of| of tlie copy of this order, the sai| respondent No.2 within a further' oM^l<n€i1i ^i^<riT ^ fe^ iFai^K ^^tRma^T .ITINKER DIWAKBR • the petitiQner. ir, Dy. A.G: with Ms. SumtaJain, bl for the petitioner is that the j'ofessor in C.M.D. CoUege, Bilaspur yeai's. He submits that though the lashment of 240 days but fche same |his several representations. |:_he petitioner his case is squareiy |e Hon'ble Apex Court in State af S^candary Schc^olf Lctchhmangarh liid therefore, in the light of the said Ipermitted to withdraw the pre&ent (sentation to respondent No.2. It is r^oy be issued to respondent No.2 for [petitioner expeditiously. |tate has no objection if any such |ie petitioner to respondent No.2 and k-dance with law. He further submits l^ould be decided in accordance ¥7ith s dismissed as withdrawn with the ality of 'the petitioner's making sucn three weeks from the date of receipt ne is expected to be decided by\ the period of two months. Sd/- pritinkerDiwaker Judge gi)