é i $§€WE EEWH 1N THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATHSGARH AT BILASPUR wan PETITION (S) No.11; I o /2o11 PETITIONER Narendra Kumar Tripathi, S/o. Late Krishna Chandra Tripathi, Aged about 51 years, presently posted as GM. Operation, Chmrurl Area of South Eastern Coalfields Limited, District-Koria (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. / Union of India g ; Through Secretary Department of Personnel 8: Training, North Block, New Delhi Secretary, Public Enterprises Selection Board, Ministry of Personnel, PG and Pensions, Public Enterprises Bhawan, Block No. 14, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003. ,vwSecretary, Ministry of Coal, Shastry Bhawan, New Delhi Chairman cum Managing Director, Coal India Lilnited, 10, Netaji Subhash Road, Kolkata West Bengal 700001, India 5. Director (Persormel and Industrial Relation) Coal India Limited, 10, Netaji Subhas Road, Kolkata West Bengal 700001, India 6. South Eastern Coalfields Limited, through Chairman—cum—Managing Director, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Seepat Road, Bilaspur (C.G.) 3W HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO. 1510 OF 2011 PETITIONER Narendra Kumar Tripathi Versus RESPONDENTS Union of lndia & Others (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon’bie Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present :- Shri Kishore Bhaduri with Shri Chandresh Shrivastava, Advocates for the petitioner. Shri R. Pradhan, Advocate for the Union of india. ORDER (ORAL) x (Passed on this 18'“ day of March 201 1) By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to quash the lists (Annexure P-1) and further a direction to the respondents No.4 & 5 to forward name of the petitioner. The issue with regard to forwarding the name of the petitioner for consideration before the Public Enterprises Selection Board had already came up for consideration in Writ Petition (S) No.847/2011 (Narendra Kumar Tripthi v. Union of India & Others), whereunder, this Court vide order dated 21.2.2011, after hearing counsel for all the parties, made certain observations in regard to the eligibility of the (. petitioner. 2. If the petitioner feels that despite the clear order rendered by this Court in W.P.(S) No.847/2011, his name is not being considered, the petitioner may approach the concerned authorities for doing the needful. No second petition at this stage for almost the similar relief, is maintainable, as the same has already been considered in the earlier writ petition and order has been passed. 3. ln view of foregoing, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- g Satish K. Agnihotri l Judge ashok