^ ie^7- ^l SIWLE BENCT BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION fS) N0.7/^ 72010 Petitioner Yudhisthir Prasad Patel, aged about 54 years, soj^. p^J-ate Bharat Lal Patel, 6ccupation^>§u^Inspector (Reverted as Head Constable) Police Station - Amabeda, Distt. Kanker (North Bastar) C.G. Respondents ^ ^' ..-:^'\^v' ^y VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Department of Home Affairs, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (CG) 2. Director General of Police, Police Head Quarter - Raipur, Distt. Raipur (CG) 3.^ Inspector General of Police, Bastar Zone, Lalbagh Jagdalpur, Distt. Jagdalpur (CG) ^ 4. Superintendent of Poiice, Dist. Kanker(CG) 5. Station House Officer, Police Station -Amabeda, Distt. Kanker (CG) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/2270F THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, \ HIGH COURT OF CHHATnSGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 713 of2010 PETITIONER Yudhisthir Prasad Patel. Aniit VERSUS RESPONDENT8 : State ofChhattisgarh & Others. WRfI' PEimON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSnTUTlON OF INDIA SB^Hon'bleShnSatishK.Afiiiuliotn,^ Present: Shri A.N.Bhakta, Advocate for fhe petitioner. Sliri A.V.Sliridhar, Pane-l. Lav^yer forthe State/respondents. ORALORDER (Passed on 18th day of Febmar>r, 2010) 1. Leamed counsel appearing tbr the petitioner submits that the respondent aufhorities are not deciding the application of the petitioner for voluntaiy retii-ement dated 21.01.2010 and 30.01.2010. 2. Without waiting for reasonable time for a decision of the respondent authorities, the petitioner has prefen'ed this petition on 10.02.2010. The petitioner ought to have waited for some reasonable time. When the applications are pending consideration before the respondent- authorities, there is no occasion to entertain a second parallel proceeding under exercise of extraordmaiy writ jurisdiction by this Court under Aiticle 226 ofthe Constitution oflndia. 3. In view ofthe foregoing, the petition is dismissed being premature at this stage. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge /