HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR § (Wn't Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) (SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri J.) Shri Al‘o‘k Dewangan, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Yashwant Singh Thakur, Deputy Advocate General with Ms Smita Ghai, Panel- Lawyer for the respondents. 0 R D E R (oral) ( Passed on this 7th day of September, 2009 ) Heard. Earlier the petiu'oner had Sled Writ Petition (S) No. 4104 of 2009, questioning the legality and validity of the same order, which is being impugned herein this writ petition. This Court aiter hearing learned counsel appearing for the parties disposed of the earlier writ petition by order dated 6"! August, 2009, on / the submission made by learned counsel for the State] Respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner wrthm a period of two weeks hom the date of dling of the representation. According to learned‘counsel appearing for the peu'tioner, no representation has been decided, till date. @WW Writ Petition (SJ No. 4935 of 2009 Petitioner - Nilay Roy, S/o Lats Shri N. C. Roy, aged about 34 years, Post —- Dmsser (Class four employee), R/o Main Road, Borgaon, Block &. Tehsil Keshkal, District Bastar, C.G. Versus Respondents 1. State of Chhatu'sgarh, thmugh the Secmtary, Public Health 85 Family Welfaxe Department, Ministxy, D.K.S. 'Bni1ding Raipur, C.G. 2. ‘ The Director, Directorate, Department of » Health and Family Welfare, Raipur, District " Raipur, C.G. 3. The Chief Medical & Health omcer, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, C.G. § 9W without expmgsing any opinion Whcther the tation is decidcd or not, second writ pemion for the same relief is not maintainable. The peh'tioner may prefer advised, if the order dated 6‘31 August, in Wn't Petition (S) No. 4104 of 200 complied with. petition is dismissed as not 4. In view of the above this 3. Be that as it may, reprcscn appropn’ate pcn'tion, if so ~2009 passed 9 is not / sm- i i Satish K. Agnihotri ‘ Judge ‘ 1" w maintainable.