IN THEHIGH COURTOF GHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR WRITPETITION (C) N0. OF 2010 PETITIONERS: .....-••n^ ^^^^ 1. Prafull Sharma, son of Lafe R. S. Sharma, aged about 57 years, R/o 2, Bakshi Marg, Chowbey Colony, Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) y<ssw' -...- ^•"" Bhaskar Tiwari, aged about 68 years, son ofLate L. P. Tiwari, R/o E-3, Shatabdi Nagar, Telibandha, Raipur (CG) ^a 3. ^ Satish Sharma, aged about 45 years, S/o Late Manohar Lal Sharrtia, R/o A-2, Ratan Palace, Katora Talab, Main Road Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 4. Mukul Tiwari, aged Abouf 70 years, son of ^. Late B B Tiwari, R/o Village and Post Pond, Via Abhanpur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ^ Vidyanand Tiwari, aged about 73 years, son ®f Late Chhabi Ram Tiwari R/o Oppt. Pani Tank Housing Board Colony Raipur (Chhattisgarh) Satanand. Sharma, aged about 75 years, son of Late Chhabi Ram Tiwari R/o infront 6f Water Tank Samata Colony, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 7. Balkrishna Sharma,aged about 87 years, son of Late Bali Ram Tiwari R/o Central, Avenue, Choubey Colony, Distt. Raipur (Chhattisgarh) / VERSUS :^1 •^ RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary, Department of Urban Administration and Developinent, Mantralaya D. K. S. Bhawan Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ^ 2. Collector, DistrictRaipur (Chhattisgarh) 3. f Municipal Corporation Through Commissioner Municipal Corporation, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN NATURE OF MANDAMUS. AND OTHER SUITABLE WRIT OR WRITS. DIRECTION OR DIRECTIONS. ORDER OR ORDERS: —.-^ ^ li iAmit PETmONERS RESPONDENTS mOH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR WRTT PETmON (C) No. 5513 of2010 PrafliU Shanna & Ofliers VERSUS State ofChhattisgarii & Others._ WMT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTTTUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'Ue Shri Sattsh K. Aenihotri. J. Present: Shri Ashish Shrivastava, Advocate forthe petitioner. Shri Anm Sao, Govemment Advocate for tfie State/respondent i No. 1 and 2. Shri Pankaj Ayswial, Advoeateforthe respondentNo. 3. ORDER (Passed oa 23" day ofNovember, 2011) 1. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in th.e - instant petition, the petitioner has sougjit a direction ta Ifae respondent No. 3 to eonsider the case ofthe petitioner Sx pwtof compensation. 2. Shri Agrawal, leamed eounsel appeming fvr tiie respondent No. 3/Coq»oratoin suhmits that if flie petitfoner makes a &esh application, the same shaU be re-considered in aceordance with law, on its own merits and perspective, after afFording proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously a^ possible, preferably within a period ofthree months fi-om the dat^ ofreceipt ofthe application. . 3. In view of Ifae above, according to leamed counsel appearing for, the petitioner, noflung Siurvives in this petitioa for adjudication. 4. Accardingly, the writ petition is disposed of No order asto costs. ; SdA Satish 3K. Agnihotri Judge B 6-j Kffiit JSSS- •'^aSi .^^•4S?^