%^ s./' HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISOARH. BIUSPVK. W.P. (81 No. 6066/2007 PBTITIONER RESPONDBNT8 2. Rama Gond S/o Shri Dukalu ^Gosd, aged about 60 years, R/o VSSscge - Jarhagaou, District Bilaspur (C.G.) Versus State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretaiy, Water Resources Deptt. Maatralaya, D.K.S. Bhawaa, Raipur (C.G.) Sub Divisional OfiBcer, Mauyari, Sub Divisioa Mungeli, District Bilaspur (C.G.) WRTT PETITION UNDBR ARTICLB 226^>F THE C<mSTITUTION OF INDIA Atipearance: Shri Sanieer Sahu, Counsel for the petitioner. Shri N.K, Agrawal, Senior Advocate and Deputy Advocate General with Shri A.S. Kachhwaha, Govt Advocate for fhe State/respondents. ORALQRDER (31.10.2007) SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. Heard. Leamed coiLasel for fhe petitioner subinits fhat a pennauent Gaiig-m.an is to be retired at the age of 62 years iu accordaace with the Chhattisgarh Shasktya Sevak (Adhivarshiki-Ayu) Adhimywn 1967 read wifh Pundainental Rules, 56. He also submits that the poiut raised has been decided by this Court ia bateh ofmatters i.e. W.P. No.108/2005 aad m.auy other coiuiected niatters on 04.01.2007, reported in 2007 12) C.G.L^J. 29 fGooiiul & Others vs. State ofC.G. cmd otfaers) and fhis matter is squarely coyered by that decision, which niay be disposed ofon fhe same terms. Leamed counsel for fhe State lairly ^rees fhat fhis inatter is covered by the said decision. However, he subniits that in soine inatters fhe State has fUed writ appeals. W.P.(S)No.6066/2007 x^ Unless some iaterim order is passed, merely on accoiint of filmg of the writ appeal, beadng of fhis writ petition cannot be kept iu abeyaace, when the matter is sqiiarely covered by fhe said judgment In the result, ttiis petition is allowed. It is disposed ofia terms of the onler dated 04.01.2007 passed in W.P. No. 108/2005 and other coimepted matters. No order as to cost. Sd/- Sunil Kurnar Sinha Judge Rao/ •anyna