C/g“ 1m )/_ $§W§£E MENEW, [L - IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.} W.P. C No...................... {7% 2011 e V1 NITA /~ / 1. Ku. W Nag D/o Gheenaram Nag Aged about 20 years; v‘ 2. Nirmal Kumar Nag S/ o Shambhuram Nag, Aged about 19 years, PETITIONERS: Both are R/o Village 8s Post— Dahikonga, Tahsil~Kondagaon, District- Bastar (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, General Adminisuation Department, D.K.S. Bhavan, Mantralaya Raipur, (C.G.) ‘ 2/ The Sub-divisionai omcer (Revenue) / Kondagaon, Distt—Bastar, (C.G.) 3. The Collector Place— Jagdalpur, Distt~Bastar, (C.G.) / 4. Tribal Research and Training Institute, Raipur Through its Joint Director, Tribal Research and Training Institute, Raipur (C.G.) PETITION UER ND ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF _ INDIAIEFOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRITS OF MANDAMUS S ‘MD ICER’FIORARI AND FOR OTHER SUITABLE WRITS AND DIRECTIONS:- ‘w ( m 200 Tumane “SB :Hcnl'ble'S r'Manindra Mohan Shriva‘stava, J. 02-02-2011 Shri Janak Hidko, counsel for the peti tioners. 5 W f .8 yih‘tDubey, Panel Lawyer the State/respondents on advance copy. Heard. Grievance of the petitioner as set ut in the petition is that though the petitioners approached respondent No.2 f r issuance of caste certificate The respondent No.3has refused issuance of c rtificate smting that there is no proof that the petitioners belong to “Dorla” Vibe. e petitioners have prayed that the respondents be directed to consider the c se of the petitioners and upon due verincation, issue proper caste certificate in vour of them. Though, it has been averred in th petition that the petitioners have approached the respondent No.2, learned c unsel for the petitioners fairly admits that the prayer was made orally and no application in writing was moved. Therefore, in such circumsmnces, no direc on can be issued to the respondent authority. If the petitioners submitted an application for issuance of caste certtflcate before the Sub Divisionai Oftic r (Revenue), Kondagaon, he shall considerthe same and take appropriate deci ion thereon in accordance with law. Needless to emphasize, if the petiti ners are still aggrieved, it would be open for the petitioners to take recourse to uch remedy as may be avaiiable to them underthe law. With the aforesaid observation, the p tition is tinatly disposed off. ,.. Sd/— Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge nae safest h