^-p » £Lh HIGH CQURT OP CHHATTISGAiai : BIIA8PUR Writ Petition (S) No. 765 of 2009 Petitioner G. L. Mesfaraini, S/o Late Sfari M. L. Meshraai, aged about 38 years, R/o Govt, H.S.S. Deepak Nagar, Dui^, Distt. Durg (C.G.) Versus Respondents 1. State of Chhattisgarh, throiigh the Secretary, Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Maatralaya, Raipur (C.G,) The Joint Dircctor, PubMc Education, Education Division, Durg (C,G.) The District Education Officer, Distt. Durg (C.G.) Prmcipal, Govt. H. S, School, Deep^k Nagar, Durg, Distt. Durg (C.G.) 2. 3. 4. (Writ Petition Under Ardcle 226/227 ofthe Constitution crflndia) (SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri J.) Shri Somkaeit Verma, Advocate for fhe petitioiier, Ms Siirdta Jam, Panel Lawyer for fhe respoiidents, O RD B R (Passed on fhis 20th day ofApril, 2009) Learaed counsel appearing for the petitioner subniits fhat fhe petitioner has prayed for a direction to fhie resp^ndents to consider his representation and release fhe annual increments of fhe petitioner, Leamed counsel ftirfher submits fhat the petltioiier does mot waat to contest fhis petition on merits, at fhis stage and prays for withdrawal of fhis petition with Hberty to matee a detealed representation before the competent aufhority. However, the concemed aufhority may be d&ected to consider aad decide fhe reprcsentation, m accordance wifh law, o& its own merits, within stipulated period. Learaed counsel appearuig for fbe respondents/State has no objectiou to the above submission made by learaed counsel appeanng for fhe petitioner. ^ ^ 7- 4. In view of ftie foregoiag, fhe petition is dismjbssed as wiffaidravsm wifh fhe above-stated Uberty, It is expected tihiat ffae concenied autiionties would consider and decide fhe representation, if aay, ia accordaace wifh. law, as early as possible, preferably witihdn a period of fhree nionffais from. fhe date of receipt of fhe reprcsentation along wiffai a copy ofthis order, Thakur Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ^\