\ w q.» an, yr 1.x n ( xWN mmmr M m n ¥ @ HIGH CGHRT OF (THHATT¥RGARH AT BUASPUR "Y vv rd i nretmun ‘l‘ (“\ ca R7 my. Law A¢4Q m (‘nn “rib n \ Alok lumar Saarthi S/o Late Sln‘i Mohit Ram Saarthi, Aka about. Z7 years, Rio viiiage Lamdad, Post. Kansabel Taiigl Bag: ha; Distt. Jashgmr (CG), VERSHS RESPONDENTS : LState of Chhattisgarh througu Secretmy, Agn'cuitm'e Department, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (CG). 2, Deputy Dimcmr, Agriculture Jashpur Nagar, Distt. Jashpur (CG). 3.93sistant Director, Agriwlture Kansabel, Jashpur, Distt. Jashpur (CG). PETETIONF‘R (WRIT PEI l l ION INDFR ARTICLE '226J227 OF THE CONSTTTI .TTTON GF TNDIA) (SB: Hon’ble , Aanilmtri I) : Sim Sanjay Patel.) Advocate for the petiticmer. Pfment Shri Y5. Takur, cpuiy Advovate mwrai for he 3mm. h D G t QRAW “RHFR (Passed on 23$ 0f Apii‘i, 261%) With the 6011sgnt ofthe. pay‘tias? the matter iS taken up for hearing finally. Leanmd counSeI appearing for the. petitioner submits tLat the father of the. petitioner was missing from 1995. Aocmding to circular dated 29.08.1986 issued by the Govemmsnt 0f mdia; if my Employee is missing for the last seven years, he. would. be deemed as dead. Tha petitioner made an application datgd 24.07.2004 (Aimexure 13/3) which is still pending consideration The. prayer is that the. respondents may be: directed to decide the pendiiig applioatioii as early as possible; 2. Sini Y_S. Thakur, learned counsel appearing for the State submits that there is no reason ash) why his application slicvnid rmi he deeidecl wiilnn reasonable time. ’3. Be that as it mav the respondents are accordingly directed. to consider and. decide the application of the petitioner dared 24.07.2004 (Annemre 13/3) on its QWn merit in aemrdanee with law, as early as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks From the date ofreceipt of a eopy oftiiis order. Jit- —7 ”is.“ 3 in- With the abcve dimm‘m: the Pemi‘m iS diSl—‘osed. of. No order asto costs. ifikii t Sty— l _ i Satire K. Agnihmn ‘Judge HA“, Sahu h! K