l’ETITIONERS 1. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR @ Writ Petiti_onjC) N0. 556 of 2009 Kn'shnabhan Singh, S/o iate Shri Padmpratap Singh, aged about 33 years, R10 Village Syahimudi, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (CG). Hemsai S/o late Shri Panchram, aged about 38 years, R/o village Syahimudi, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (CG). Suri’i Ram, S/o late Shxi Mukut Ram, aged about 34 years, R/o village > Syahimudi, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (CG). Santram S/o late Shri Jugutram, aged about 35 years, R/o viliage Syahimudi, Tahsii Katghora, District " Korba (CG). Prahlad, S/o late Shri Bundsai, aged about 22 years, R/o viiiage Syahimudi, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (CG). Ramesh Kumar S/o Late Shri Dhaniram, aged about 34 years, R/o village Syahimudi, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (CG). Kanhayalal, S/o Chunnilal, aged about 24 years, R/o village Syahimudi, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (CG). Kamaldev, s/o late Shri Yashpal Singh, aged about 27 years R10 village Syahimudi, Tahsil Katghora, Disuiict KeiiSakCG). Gyanik Ram, S/o Motiram, aged about 36 years, R/o village Syahimudi, Tahsil Katghora, District .Korba (CG)- Kishore Singh, s/o Ram Kumar, aged about 41 years, 10. R/o village Jailgaon, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (CG). Laxmi Prasad S/o Uday Ram, aged about 36 years, 11. R/o Village Syahimudi, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (CG). / l5. RESPONDENTS l7. l8. 1. Narmada S/o Teejaram, aged about 36 years, R/o 12. Viliage Jailgaon, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (CG). Itwar, S/o late Shri Nankuram, aged about 32 years, 13. R/o Village Jailgaon, Tahsil Katghora, District Knrba (CG). Kumar Singh, S/o Sampat Singh, aged about 32 14. years, R/o Village Jailgaom Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (CG). Ramkumar S/o BharatiaL aged about 24 years, R/o Village Syahimudi, Tahsil Katghora, Distnbt Korba (CG). Pramod Kumar S/o late Shri Harishchandra, aged l6. aboat 33 years, R/o village Navagaon Kala, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (CG). Virendra Pal Singh, S/o late Shri Shivnindra Pal Sing}; aged about 32 years R/o Navagaon Kala, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (CG). Rajkumar .Kanwar S/o Pantlal Kanwar, aged about 24 years, R/o village Jailgaon, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (CG). Rajendra Singh, Ganendra Singh, aged about 22 l9. years, R/o village ‘Syahimudi, Tahsil Katghora, Distdct Korba (CG). Shankar Das, S/o Ganesh Das, aged about 40 years, 20. R/o village Navagaon Kala, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (CG) i Prahlad Singh, S/o Sarbhavan Singh, aged about 19 21. years, R/o Jailgaon, Tahsil Katghora, District vKorba (CG). VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary. Department ofPower, DKS Bhawan, Mantralaya, (Raipur (CG). Chhattisgarh State Electn'city Board, Danganiya, Raipur (CG), through its Chairman. Executive Engineer (Civil), Hasdeo Thennal Power Station, Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board, Korba (West), District Korba (CG). 4. Chhattisgarh State Power Generation Company Limited, through its Managing Director, Dangam'ya, Raipur (CG). (WRIT PE‘UTION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUHON OF INDIA) QB: Hon'hle Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J.) Present :i Shri Shashank Thakur, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri Alok Bakshi, Govt Advocate for the State. ORAL ORDER (Passed or: 30 day of Januam', 2%9) With the consent ofthe parties, the matter is taken up for hearing finally. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, on instructions, submits that at this stage, the petitioners do not want to contest the matter on‘ merit at this stage. ‘ However, the petitioners restricted their prayer that they may be permitted to‘ make a representation to the authorities concerned and in tum, the respondent authorities may be directed to consider and decide their representations in accordance with law on its own merits as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period ofeight weeks from the date ofrepresentations. 2. Leamed counsel iinther submits that the identical dispute came earlier for consideration wherein Shri Prashant Mishra, Sr. Advocate, appearing for the Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board submitted that there was no objection to decisionon representations. Thus, present petition may also be disposed of in the same terms 3. In view of the foregoing, according to learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, nothing survives for adjudication. 4. in view ofthe foregoirétheiiiespdndent authorities are directed to consider and decide the representations filed by the petitioners, pending before them, within a period of eight weeks from the receipt ofa copy ofthis order. 5. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. No order asto costs. O‘tI Sd/— i, , i , i Satish K. Agnihptri , Cpnsequently, LA No. 01, application for grant of interim relief, also stands disposed of. ‘v l i l Judge H,