^ (D BEFORETHEJTON'BLE HIGH_COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR fC.G.) WRIT PETITION ( S) NO.^&^ OF 2011 PETITIONERS \> ^>"". >•'; N^^Y^ ..^ ^ o RESPONDENTS 1. Ramlal Patel S/o Kunjbihari Patel, Aged about 54 years, Lecturer, Government Higher Secondary School, Gorra, Tahsil - Pussore, District - Raigarh (C.G.) / 2. Nakul Ram S/o Puniram Sidar, aged about 58 years, Head Master, Middle School, Naurangpur, Tahsil 85 District Raigarh (C.G.) VERSUS 1.^ State of Chhattisgarh through - The Secretary, School Education Departnaent, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.). 2. The Collector, Raigarh, District- ,Raigarh (C.G.). / 3. District Education Officer, Education Department, Raigarh, District- , Raigarh (C.G.). 4. Treasuiy Officer, Treasury Account and Pension, Raigarh, District - Raigarh (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226_QF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUENCE OF WRIT OR WRITS, ORDER OR ORDERS, DIRECTION OR DIRECTIONS UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMDTANCES OF.THE CASE. 1)' PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER:- The petitioner No.'l and 2 are working as Lecturer and Head Master respectively at their respective place of posting with :.^,-i^:--:^^~t^ xi-'WKc.'.-.fe'aSa'-vt'iiyss.:•-f^v,as3^,ft;'^SES.sa~'s'Si'sssStisf,!yyi'^f^ssssisSKS^tSfs^aKaatsa.a ...•^c'a^.. ,!;-:,^X ^ ?i •^'y' / '•?!- '•%•f^ ^ nlGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETSTION (S) N0. 1786 OF 2011 PETITIONERS RESPONDENTS Ramlal Patel & Another Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitutlon of India) Slngle Bench : Hon'bie ShriSatish K. Agnihotri, J. Shri S.K.Tiwari, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri AjiS Singh, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORDER fORAU (Passed on 01s[ day of April, 2011 i! 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, on instruction, submits that the petltioners do not want to contest this petition on merits at this stage, and prays for wlthdrawal of this petition with iiberty to make a representation in the iight of the circular dated 05.01.2011 (Annexure P/5). 3. Learned Panei Lawyer appearing for the State/respondents submits that if a representation is made, the same shatl be considered and decided within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the representation, in the light of the above- stated circular. 4. irt view of foregoing, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the above-stated liberty. It is expected that the concerned authorities would consider and decide the representation, if any, as above, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the representation along with a copy of this order. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge as"iok "ll;.::