(D SINGLE BENEH IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT pETrrION (S) No. $77 35 /201 1 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS Ramnarayan Sahu, S/o. late Shri Mhettar Lal Sahu, aged about 27 years, Shiksha Karmi Grade—III, Present1y working at Govt. Girls Middle School Charcha Collory, District Korea (C.G.) VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Urban Administration 85 Development Department, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) Development Department, Bilaspur, Distt Bilaspur (C.G.) Sub Divisional Officer, Baikunthpur, District Korea (C.G.) Chief Municipal Officer, Municipal Council Shivpur, Charcha, District Korea (C.G.) @ 2. The Collector, Baikunth’pur, Distt Korea (C.G.) 3. The Deputy Director, Urban Administration and @ Gend Ram Rathore, Chief Municipal Officer, presently posted at Municipal Council, Shivpur Charcha, District Korea (C.G.) , WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA A 4‘7 HIG‘H COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (Hon. Mr. Justice Pritinker Diwaker) w.P.(S) No. 5433 of 2011 Petitioner Ramnarayan Sahu_ VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh nd others Pregant: Shri Rajesh Kumar harma, coun3el for the petitioner. Shri Y.S. Thakui’, Dy. A.G. for the State/resondents No.1 to 4.‘ ORDER (15.09.2011) Shri Sharma fairly submits that there exists an aiternative remedy for the petitioner to fie a appeal undr‘ule 13 of Chhattlsgarh Nagar Palik Shiksh Karml (apintment nd service condition) Rules, 2008 before respondent No.2 and theree, he may prmitted to withdraw this petitin with the aforesai lberty. e, howeVer submits that responden No. be directed to decide the appeal of the petitioner on merits igoring te point of limitation. 2. Learned cousel for the State submits that he has no objection if the petitioner withdraws this petition and files ny appeal before the competent authority. He further submits that the petitioner would be at liberty to file appropriate application before the appellate authority for condonation of delay and the said application would be deced in accordance with law. 3. The petitioner is permitted to withdraw this petition with he aforesaid liberty. Accordingly, the petition is dismiss as withdrawn. 4. ln the eventuality of filing any peal long wit the application for condonation of delay by the petitner within hree weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, the ppellate Respondents a S 5 p l n eR a, a po a for be e o d i H t 2 n h n a id t ed ap a h io t a @ authority'shall decide the same in accordance with law ignoring the point of limitation. it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and the authority concerned would be at liberty to decide the same strictly in accordance‘vi/Litall‘law. Sdl- Pritinker Diwaker 1‘ Judge Priya