IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUE w.P. (C) No. WBWO /201o PETITIONER T.K. Tiwari, aged about 42 years, Son of Shri N.P. Tiwari, R/o Plot No. 68, Street No. C, Triveni Nagar (Smriti Nagar) Bhilai Distt. Durg (co) VERSUS RESPONDENTS ’ :f 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Department of Town Administration and Development Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Municipal Corporation, Bhilai, through its Commissioner, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (C.G.) 3. Tahsildar, Durg (C.G.) 4. Smt. sujata Hari, W/o Shri K. Hari, aged about 38 years, R/o 3—121. Street No. 13, smriti Nagar, Bhilai, Durg, Distt. Durg(C.G.) 5. Smt. Punam Shukla, W/o Shri ‘AK. ‘Shukla, aged about 40 years, R/o H.N. 4—5, Professor Colony, Nehru Nagar, Bhilai, Distt. Dur‘gp(C.G.) A 6. The State / Chhattisgarh, ,;v,‘:EleetriCity Board, through — Office Incharge, Asstt. Engg. ,,,//’ / CSPDCL, Kohka, Bhilai Distt. Durg (CG). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSITUTION OF INDIA. HIGH COURT OF CHHA'ITISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present: Shri Prashant Jayaswai, Senior Advocate with Shri Ashish Beck, Advocate for the petitiomr. Shn' P.K.Bhaduri, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent No. '1 and 3. Shri Ashutosh Kachhwaha, Advocate for the respondent No. 2. Shri Amiya Kant Tivvari Advocate for the respondent No.4. ORDER ORAL (Passed on 23‘ day of August, 201 1) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the representation of the petitioner dated 13.03.2009 (Annexure P/3) is pending consideration before the respondent No. 2. More than two years have passed, till date, no decision has been taken on the said representation. Thus, the respondent .No. 2 may be directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representation and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. 2. Shri Kachhwaha, learnedcounsel appearing for the respondent No. 2 submits that in the event, the representation as aforestated, is pending consideration, the same shall be considered and decided aiter adbrding an opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. 3. Learned counsel appearing for other parties have no obj ection. 4. In View of the above, the respondent No. 2 is accordingly directed to consider and decide the representation, as aforestated, atter affording proper opportunity of hearing to all the concerned parties and after considering their cases, preferably within a period ot‘four weeks from the date ofreceipt of a copy ofthis order. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. 6. No order asto costs. Sci/- Satish K. Agnihotri s Judge Amit /’/, WRIT PETITION (C) No. 7340 of2010 PETITIONER T.K.Tiwari. VERSUS ‘ RESPONDENTS : State ofChhattisgarh & Others.