^' ^a ^Kesponofini No.D (Respondent 2. M^, ^\ iMU.^.^ Stste of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Department of Water Resources, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur fr* r^ \ '•"•/ The Chief Engineer Mahanadi Godawari Basln Water Resources Department, Raipur (C.G.) (Resoondent M^ ^>\ i^U.^/ 3. The Executive Engineer, Electrical/ Mechanlca!, Light Machinery Tube Well & Gate Division, Water Resources Department, Durg (C.G.) (Petltioner) Lakhanlal S/o Mohan Lal Jha, aged about 64 years, R/o Village Arjuni, Tehsil Dongargaon, District Rajn »**•'•«i*^»n fr^ n \ \\^.^3.) Writ Appeai under Section 2 Sub-Section (1) ofthe Chhattlsaath Hiah Court I'Apsea! to Division BenchS Act.20C6. Present: Shri Kishore Bhaduri, learned Additionat Advocate Genera! forthe appellants/ State. None for the respondent. ISt The foliowlng order of the Court was passed by "^^. ^^p*" •'^'.Wsi-y^ Shri Kishore Bhaduri, learned Additionaf Advocate General is on i.A. No. 01/2010, an appticatlon for condonation of the in filing the writ appeal. 2) On due consideration of the submissions of iearned counsel for the appellants/ State and the grounds taken In fhe application, we are satisfied that the appellants/' State has succeeded in sho'wing sufficient cause for the delay in filing the 3) I.A. No.01/2010, therefore, is allowed and the delay in filing the wrrt appeal is hereby condoned. 4) Shri Kishore Bhaduri, learned Additional Advocate Genera! is heard on admission. ?) Shri Kishore Bhaduri, learned Additional Advocate ©enerai challenged the impugned order dated 05-04-2010 on the sole ground that as respondent Lakhanfal was never absorbed in the penslonary post, the decisions in the cases of M.A. Hakim v. State of Madhya Pradesh (Now C.G.) & Others and Jhuniya Bai v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others would not be applicable to the fac4s of the case. S) Learned Additionai A.dvocate Generat did not dispute that the above fact could not be brought to She notice of the learned Single Judae as no counter affidaviV return was fited in the writ petition. 7) Learned Additionai Advocate Genersl, in view of the above fact, seeks permission to withdraw the writ appeal with the tiberty of filina a review petition in the matter. i) Permission 9) With the above tiberty, the writ appea! is dlsmissed as wnnarawn. Sd/- ChiefJustice Sd/- ; Suiiil Kumar Sinha Judge subbu