Singig Liamm ‘ v \(jCD ’w’ G (O WP. No8<u4+ 2005 /W€rwm1°qmfqmtrq§wi%m 31; WWI so am‘ HTFeb—ri W WET, mmaaai W =‘t. 2 arm W‘ W WgMgJT.) .. (1) W :iama: frw 117:? Waw frwm WHUT (an) WI /(4) $°r W a%:r& fr‘a‘rrn sirfmim? (Via wemfr) W frw @i W11 E6? trrrf W 3%? 3mm“ (an). 3mzawaattn ;{ aiéQI/iia m aiaaia 31w ‘22€> mi?! ai a§a 227 31R?&a, zif§ana l \ / a? 3W W farm“ frilitm . wk b5 W3} ($11.) /(2) W Hf‘aa W 1%Tsm we? ° a? WW Wm fér‘wm , g‘h$.$m WEI; ($31.) WKL /(3) W Eq—‘a‘mTvl—oh‘ frw E‘W Q? XI-HC—78 . W4). mm» g0x4’2’mjg WW.‘oo..ooo«‘o.oooo ‘ 200 W t1? mWW>I mmm WWW , mmm > ‘ > ‘W $§§§§ .. “ 15.03.2005 Shri S.U. Shareef, counssl for the petitiomr. Shri Sanjay S. Agrawal, GoVL Advocate for tha State on advance qo‘pi . Heard on admisssion. Leamed counsel for the petitioneT Submiis that the. p<3titi0ner was dismissed from s€rvice Vide imp'ugied order dated 6.1.2003 (Annexare-P/l). He fairly adms that under Rule 23 of the MP. (C.G.) Civil Services (Classification. Control and Appeal) Roles, 1966, there is a provision of appeal but the peiitioner has not availed the aforesaid remedy. He seekt; pennission‘ to withdraw this Ipetition With liberty to file an appeal before the eppr‘opriate authority under the aforesaid Rule. Since alterna‘tiVe remedy is available to the petitioner. there is no impediment in granting permission for withdrawal of the petition on above term. Accordingly, the permiséiion is granted. The ipetition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to file en appeal before the appropriate authority under the provisions ofthe aforesaid Rules. k/ Sd/. h i» SUNIL KUMAR SINHA " Judge