mm .................................. 3mm (mu) mmm , $11200 ................. mmiwm érafhwm 'P ‘S‘ . Na. 2'76 i2€£02§ are 'n Son nail, resmient of Fiat No. 356 b hmiti Nagar, Bhiiai, Distt Durg, Lsgex“ ate of Chham‘egarh, through the GF-m‘w“ AdminiStration Llt (Tnnector, Dis Ldi‘Lionai Chit-f Vigilanct'. rtesi FLEmt, Emmi, Uurg ”El. Managpr DEM Bhilai Steel P19“ Burg CG :LE 2-26 6F TEE ccKsyTiTUTIaK a? tNDIA nit vul MJVJ I—l -!1 nNi‘JQ Vasiis RE$F§§EE§TS (D« 0£ 4:. PETI‘TiKTi‘? UNDER ARTii S 11 Th Tiwari, Advacam . Kachhavvaha, m Dr, Nix Shukla, Sr. Adv. "adav, Advoca‘ms for the Bhiiai ‘ 1116 petmoner 13 aggrmva 6 ciated 4— 10—2007 addlESsgc‘i Bhilai St€€1 Piant, by fans Coila after cmlc‘iucting mlquiry has 1. sch€€iui€€i H1136 caSte catifwate C10Cum€11t Nimhc 1 awed b abeut 40 ye {1vn pent, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG) ff: hurcro KW“ \ " “'1' Oi’iical‘, 11+w , for the p€tition€r. > ‘. Adv. Gencrai, for th€ State. with S1111. A. Sengu‘pm and Snri AK. Stem Main by m6 memomlmum of Aimexuré P- tQ tha Ganemi Managér (Vigilance), tor, Eurg Whm‘aiu the send auihority Leici ¥that the petitioner haS obtained on the basis of forged and iabn'cateci XI-HC—78 WW @ii'm‘lg ’ ) bu? £9 NV 17 mm 4 /&‘€ an 200 mmm mm (Wt?) WW§WW $aimm Leamsd counsel for the conducmd "by the Joint CoHec Amemre. P—G are without jurist} to the petitioner can only be Vem‘ Sommittee constitutaii by the direction of the Hon’iiie Suprem 15595 SC 94). manlad COHHSEI appeal submitted mat they have no Annexure F-é is quashed with h' caste certiflcate iSsuesl to the p Le. High Levei Caste Sorut veriflcation. ‘ in View of the above su parties, the instant petition Annexure $6 issued by the Coii respondents shah he at hherty‘ t High Level Caste Scrutiny Co the caste statusicertificate of down in Madhuri Patti’s ease (A shah cieoide the matter after aft" parties. aetitioner submits that the enquiry ltor and the fmding recortievi Vide 1ct10n as the caste certificate issued Eiec‘i i by the High Levei Caste Scrutiny State of Chhattisga’rh as per the e Court in Macihuri PatiYs case (Ail? ting for the respontients jointly objection if the memorandum of berty to the respondents to refer the Etitioner to the competent authority my Committee, C‘nhattisgarh for 51011 0f i116 i6al7l€d§ COUHS€£ fOI‘ HIE ailowed. The. memorandum of etor, Burg 1s quashed. However, the formant the caste celtificate to the ttee, Chhattisgarh for verification of petitioner as per guideh'nes lain R l§§5 SC 94). The said Committee rding opportunity of hearing to the Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra l Judge n Lh-w», b m‘ 3 's i e