$§ngle Beneh E IN THE I-HGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR w.P. (S) N0.5R 1 /2oo9 V, Dwarika Prasad Choubey, S/o Late Shri Kalpdhari Choubey, aged about 60 years, Working as Head Master, Primary School, Koiritola, Ramanujganj, Block- Ramchandrapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.) PETITIONER Law V UR RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh Through- the Secretary, Department of Tribal Welfare, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Ambikapur Distt. Surguja (C.G.) Proj ect Administrator, Akikrit Tribal Development, Project Pal, Ramanujganj, District Surguja (C.G.) Block Education Officer, Ramanujganj, District Surguja (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA @i" HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION ($) NO.5562I2009 PETITIONER Dwarika Prasad Choubey Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chha“isgafh and othels (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of india) §inqlg Egnch: Hon'm shri $ati$h K. Aqnihotri. J, Present: - Shri A. N. Pandey. counsel for the petitionet. Shri M.P.S. Bhatia, Deputy Govt. Advocate for the State. ORAL ORDER (Passed on this 25‘“ day of September, 2009) With the consent of learned counsei for the parties. the petition is heard finally. (2) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner has not been granted relief pursuant to the order 16-06-2008 (Annexure P13) and the correspondence is going on between the Block Education Officer and the Project Administrator, Integrated Tribal Welfare Development Project. Pal. Ramanujganj, District surguja. Learned counsel further submits that despite his exoneration from the departmental enquiry proceedings from 16-06-2008 (Annexure P/3). the petitioner has been denied the benetits. (3) Be that as it may, there is nothing to adjudicate upon in this matter as the order has already been passed in favour of the petitioner. This is a petition where he claims that the respondents may be directed to make the payment as ordered on 1606-2008(Annexure P/3). This Court should not normally interfere with the process‘to settle the dues. However, in the facts situation of the case. the respondents are directed to settle the outstanding payment of the petitioner as early as possible preferabie within a period of three months. (4) With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/— Satish K. Agnihctri s Judge Tumhe