•S^.s^^ -^. 'iNRI E urs.^ 1^-f -2® IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (Ct No.?T?^ ^-72006 PETITIONER Makhan Lal'Dhruwa, aged about 6'^i}^* 30 yea.rs, S/o Shri Kashiram •ly^-''^ \,..--° R/oVillage Nawapara, Tahsil ^'^'M^^' ^o\y .;->.^~^--' ..-• ^y"o^y^ •:•:/'" ^''' ^v »• RESPONDENTS Kasdol, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS 1. The State ofChhattisgarh,^ Througii Secretary, Porest Departmen-t, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur ^M f^0^ ^ ^'v61 ^>^'' 2. Union of India, through Secretary Forest Department, New DeJhi 3. Forest Range Officer,, Baranwapara (AbhyaranJ, Distt. Raipur 4. Divisional forest Officer,//^ General Forest Di-vision, Raipur WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^ XI-HC-78 *11*1CTI Sh*ll<t> T^'^Wvi-ti, wKwie, Rciiuy _.^^.^^^^ 200 3TT^?T cra^ ('iqI'i'siyT) sn^Twfq-iN) (is(T3n^rst"i ?TaiW(ri?a'3ii^r 12.10.200S Shri Parag Kotecha, counsel] Shri Arun Sao, Govt. Advocal on advance copy. Shri Raghvendra Pradhan, c^ India on advance copy. Argumentsheard. Qrderdfctated asfotlows: OaALORDER SUNILKUMARSINHA.J. By way of this writ petitio Constitution of India, the petitione directions to She State authorities constitution and election of the with the said prayer, he has ateo pra schedul the date for election of Shi should aiso be quashed. The subject matter of this the subject matters of WP No.552. have been heard and dismissed by tl Learned cpunsel for the petil State/respondents does not dispute In view of the above, this Wri stage on the grounds and reasons in W.P. No.5524/2006 andW.P. No.i +lofd<n-f tllKdTfffecAttezR ^? 3(f^IT 3T|iRT 'or the pet'rtioner. 3 for the State/respondents No.1, 3 & 4 unsel for respondent No.2/ Union of 2.10.200S) filed underArticte 226/227 of the r, has prayed for issuance of certain formulate the rules pertaining to the mefnbere of Van Swaksha Samiti. Along /ed that Ihe memo Annexure P-3, which office bearere of Van Suraksha Samiff, WHt /|it Petition is exactly identical to that of t/2006 and W.P. No.5525/2006, which (is Court vide orders dated 10.10.2006. iJbner as well as learned counsel for the f|iisfactual position. IPetifion is ateo dismissed at the motion t^ted in orders dated 10.10^006 pa^ed S|525/2006. Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge ^