25‘ HESE €G§JRT {)F €H§§§T§§GARE AT BiMgPb‘R EE? Z’ETETE 0. 7699 afzmw PETETEGNER : D1: S.K.Tiwa§‘i S/o Lima S’m‘i Sacianand Tiwam', aged @011? 51 years, workmg as Radioiogist R/e M.I.G. 55 Nam; Nagar, Biiaspur. RES?@1%}ENTS VERSUS Siam of Chhmirsgarh Through: The Secretagy, Depamnent ofHeahh 8c Family Welfare, D.K.S. Building, Evianiralaya, Raipur {08.) 2. The Directoz; Heai‘th Sewices Raipur (CG) 3 The ChiefMe-dical Officeig Biiaspur (C(32) WRIT PE’HTIGN UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTIOV OF INDEA M SE: Han’hk 5m? Sa$§sh K. A VMhOWi .3. Presem: Shj‘i Sameer Behar: Advocate for the petiziooer. Shri Ajay Dwivedi, ?anei Lawyar for the State/respandents. Amit ORAL GERBER (Passed on 04E” day of January, 2008) beamed counsel appearmg f0? the petitioner suiuni‘is that pumuemt to the order cia‘ted 3rd January, 20W, passad £13 W.P.(S) Na. 1449 of 20Ci5 {SKTiwari Vs. mm of M13, (Now Chhaiiisgai‘h) and. othsrs}, 1116 yespaziden‘c auihom‘tées have paid a sum 0f Rs. 3 1,7271 iowards nave-13mg alEowauae which was due f0? the periec‘i fmm NQvember 1984 t0 July 1990. Leamed counsei for the pw‘iimwr sntitied to inigres‘i 011 11% said amount Ski Ajay Dwivedi, ieameé Pane} Lawyer appearing for thg Siaie/respogdems submits that m the event if an appiicatioa for paymem‘ 0f inierest is made by the petitioner, the same shaH be considered in aecon‘laiice with law. E1 View of ihe foregoéog: tee petitioeer is gamed §ibeiiy :0 make 'epi‘esemation for gjayi‘ggei}: ef interest if: the: evem; the respondem “iuiherieies are diz‘ecied i0 eezisidef 611161 decide the represemaiier: of ‘ihe peeitiener e iimher submits that since the amoum became due 301g back, the §etiti0ner is w—A L)A aceoycianee with 1e am} dispoee i: of expeeéiioesiv as early as isms: preferebiy Withii; a period ef on weeks from iiie (kite of receiei 0f J5 1‘epz‘ese;1.e‘£iori. 113 view ofihe above, this eetiiion stands dispelsed o£ No order as :0 303$ /M 1 sw— Satish K. Agnihotrl Judge W QN ‘ N