f gmgh wmh 3’ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH CGURT or: CHHATrISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.) WRIT PETITION (S) No. %$6A OF 2009 / PETITIONERS : 1. Shriram Khare Son of Jodhiya Ram Khare, aged about 35 years, Guruji at E.G.S. Center, Bhatapara Makeri, Resident of Village Makeri, P.O. souta, Tahsil Pamgarh, District Janjgir—hampa (C.G.). 2-/ Ram aresh Burman Son of Dhaniram Burman, uruji at E.G.. enter Mhamaya Mohalia Dhangaon, Reside of Village hanaon, Post Rasta Tahsil mgarh, District ou, Pa Janjgir-Champa C.G.). Balram Dheevar Son of Babulal Dheevar, aged about 35 years, Guruji at E.G.S. Center Jokhiapara, Rsident o Villag Doga Kohrod, Tahsil Pamgarh, Ditrc Janjgir-hampa (C.G.). 4. Reshamlal Yadav Son of Shri Bhisan Ram Yadav, aged about 28 year G a Batapara, Resident of Bhatapra, Village Pagaria, via Nariyara, Thsil Paarh, District Janjgir-Champ .G.). Rakuar Patel So of Shri Daam Paglel, aged about years, Residet of Village Byasnagar, Post Bhison, Pice ation and Tahsil Pamgarh, District Janjgir—Chpa (C.G.. 6.Buvaneshwar Ratre Son of Shri Bhakhlaram, aged about 40 years, Resident of Village Dudga, Post Bhadra, Tahsil Pamgarh, District Janjgir—Champa (C.G.). e f e n sit C / h s, uruji at E.G.S. Center Lagr h a a mg a (C / 5. VERSUS Ra ' C N G S C a nt Dg ( jm n ur 32 n a ol St am ) /h HEGH COURT OF CHHA’E'TESGH A? EELA$PUR (Han. Mr. Justiae Pritinker DEwaker) Writ Petitian ($) N0. 33% of 2909 PEHTEGNER Shri Ram Khare and others. VERSUS REsPOiWENTS State of Chhattisgarh and others. Shri Prashant Jaiswal learned Sr. Counsel with Shri Shaif Khan counsei for the petitioners. Shri Yashwant Singh Thakur and Shri Shashank Thakur, PL for the respondents/State. WRH' PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CON$TWUTI6N OF INDEA 0 RD E R (13.Q?.2€)09) finaiiy. With ihe consent of the counsel for the parties, the matter is heard Counsei for the petitioners submits that against the order impugned dated 13.12.2008 the petitioners have aiready preferred an appeal before the Coitector, Jahjglr in February, 2G09 which has not yet been decided._ He submits that a direction may be issued to the Collector for deciding the said appeal expeditiously and if possible some time frame may be given. To this request of the counsel for the petitioners. counsel for the respondents/State has no objection. Accordingly, it is directed that the respondent No. 2 shall decide the appeat already preferred by the petitioners wtthln a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, if it remains undecided so far. With these observationsi the petition is disposed of} V Sd/- i i Pritinker Diwaker i Judge ii ii