<1^ HI0H COURT OFCHHATTCS^ARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (5) No.2T7'2 of 2008 Petitioner Vinod Chuuhan, S/o B- 5- ^hauhan, aged about 34 years, Constable in the Chhattisgarh Police, R/o at p 5ent Rodho Swami Sat^sng, Rudri ftoad, Dhamtar*!', District Dhamtari Versus ^spDndents 1. The State of ChhQtti^gart'i, through : Jhc &cretary, DepartmenT of Police, and Home AffaSrs, DX5. Bhawarj, Raipur (C.G.}. 2. Tt^e DirscTor 6enerd of PoJJce, Chhuttisgarh, P.M.Q. Raipur- (C.5.). 3. The SuperlntsndenT of Police, Narayanpur, (C.6.\ WRIT PETmON UNbER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDI.A Slr^le Bench : Hon'bSe Mr. Satish K. Agnthotri. J. Shrl P. K. Tulsynn, Advocate for the petitjoner. Shri yQshwont Singh Thokur, D^put^ Advocate fisnsrTiS for the r^spond&nt^ No. 1 to 3. ORALORbER (Passed on this 16th day of June, 2008) 1- With the cong^nt of Ssarned counSKi appKGring for ths pQrtifi^, tha pstitiors i5 hanrc! finully- 2. L£arn^d coun^! appsarsng for the pstitionsr, on instructson^, ^ubiriit^ that tha pstitsoner cSoe^ not want to prs55 ti-ii^ petition on merits at this ^tage. Mow^vsr, 1Jh& respondsnt/authorit/ be ^ dirscted to con^sdsr 1+is rspr^sentatson doted 17.4.2008 (Annexura P/3), panding befor^ 1^i^ respondBnt No.2, ori it5 oyyTs m^rit^, irs nccordancs wsth Saw. 3. Shri Yu^hwant Singh TTiakur, {^Qrnsd D&puty Advocate 6anerG! app^srsng for the rsspondsnts/Stuts submit^ thot there s^ no rea^on why th& p&ndsng repra^^ritotion woutd not ba d&cid^d by th^ concgrnsd authority, sxpeditiougSy- 4. Tn visw of tha abovs, it i^ &xp&di^nt that ths repr&^&ntation be d^cldsd by the concerned auitiorsty, on it^ own m^nt^, in accordoncs with Saw, withsn a p&riud of thres ws&ks from ths date of rsc&ipt of a copy of this ordsr- 5- Tt s5 ordsrsd QccordingSy. 6. In visw of thi£foregoing, ths^ p&tition ^tands dispo^&d of. No costs. Sd/- Satish KAgnihotri Judge Thakur