IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR w. p. 1C] No. 52M?) / 2011 Petitioner:- Aadiwasi Machua Sahakai‘i Samiti Maryadit Through its secretary R/o Nagaldand, P.V. 89 Pakhanjur, Distt. Uttar Bastar Kanker (C.G.) VERSUS Respondents /1. Chief Executive officer, Janpad Panchayat Koilibeda Distt. Uttar Bastar Kanker (C.G.) 2. The Collector Distt. Uttar Bastar Kanker (C.G‘) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 l 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA O 99 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPE .T; WRIT PETITION (S) N0. 5243 of2011 PETITIONER : Aadiwasi Machua. Sahakaii Samiti Maryadit. VER SI IS Chief Executive Officen & Another. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226f227 OF THE CONSTIE‘UI‘ION ' OF NDIA S’B: Han’hie Shri Satish K. AgnmotriLJ. RES?ONDENI‘S Pre$ent Shri Punit RuparsL Advocais for fhs petitianer. Shri Arun Sm), Govemrrwm Advocate with 8111i Shashalm Thakurg Paml Lawyar far the Staiefrwpondem No: 2: 0 R I) E R (Passed (m {)9‘E aiay 0f September, 201 1) L By this petitim the/petitioner seeks a direction to the wspondent amhoritias té considsr and décidg his applicatien datad 02‘07‘2011 for grant 0f iease for thé year 201 1-12. 2, Law in Ihw regard is well {Kettled that. a. $tatutory represéntatitm 01‘ appeal has to be decided within a, reasanabls time Le, within 3 m 6 months, A seven Judges Bench 0f iha Suprema Caum in SS.Ratkore v. State ofM’adhya Pradelgkl , observed as unde : “1'21 Redressa}. of grievances in the hands 0f the ciepamnental authorities taken at; unduly leng time, Tkmt is So on aceeunt of the fact. that 110 aitemion h; ordiriarily besl0we& over these manets and {hey axe net. considered i0 he govemmenta’l business of substance. This approach hes to be depreeated and auihoriiies on whom power is vested to dispose of agpeais and revisions under the Service Rules must dispose of such maifem as expeditiously a3 pessible Qrdinarily, a period of ihree 10 six monihs shouici be the Quiet Limit, That. would diseipline the system and keep the public: servant away from a protraeted period of litigaiionr” The petitioner, wiihout waiting for a reasonable time, has rushed to this Court. seekirrg the above staied direction: Thus, m) reiief a: this stage may be gianted to the petitioner, U) 4, Aoeordingly, the petition is dismiseed. No order aeto costs, i i 1 v Sd/— Satish I Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ‘ (£989) 4 soc 352 ¥ 7' \.