PETITSQNER OF : (S) N0. OF 2008 R.B. Singh, S/o B. Slngh, abow 56 years, presently posted and working as In- charge Superiritendlng Englneer/Project Administrator, Mahanadi CADA Project Ralpur (CG). Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through the PrincipaS Secretary, Department of Water D.K.S. Buildlng, MantraSaya, Raipur (CG). 2. Engineer-in-ChJef, Water Resources Department, Sihava Bhawan, (CG). 3. Addltlonai Secretary. Water Resources Department Chhattlsgarh, Ralpur (CG). 4. PubSic Sen/ice Commission, Chhattisgarh, Rajpur (CG), through its Secretary. 5. Arun Kumar Swamakar, Project Adminjstrator, Hasdeo Ayakat Project, BiSaspur (CG). 6. Mahesh Kumar Joshi, Superintending Engineer, OfRce of the Chief Engineer, Mahandl Project, Raipur (CG). 7. D.K. Jaln, Superintending Engineer, Nagariya Prasasan & Development Department, Ralpur (CG). 8, Shekhar Prasan Sen Gupta, Superintending Engineer, in-charge Chief Engineer, Mahanads Godawari Kachhar, Rsjpur (C<G). 9. G.P.S. Baghel, SuperintendJng Englneer, Hasdeo Project Divjsion, Rampur, Korba (CG). OA^rit petitlon under Article 226 Qf the Constitution of india) Singie Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satlsh K. Agnihotri, J. Present: Shri 8.D. Guru, counse! for the petjtioner. Shri Yashwant Singh Thakur, Dy. Advocate General for the State. ORAL ORDER (Passed on this 8th day of Ssptember, the consent of counsei fw th^ the is finally. ^-< ^,, S •^^s^ 1 ^. '"^^i^^ ^ ^ •^^"•••"^^ ^; ^, '^. J / \,^^/ "'^&^^"' —-L^ 2) I .earned counse! appearing for the petjtloner submits that the petitjoner does not want to this petition on merits, at this However. the respondent authorities may be directed to consider and riecide the representatlon 1-8-2008 (Annexure-P/5), In accord-ance wlth law, on its own merits, within the prescribed time. 3) Shri Yashwant Singh Thakur, le^rned Deputy Advocate General appearing on behalf of the submlts that the representetion 1-8-2008 (Annexure-P/5) shalj be considered and decided by the concerned authorifr^, jn aocordance with iaw, on its owrs rriems, within a peric^d offour from the of receipt of a copy of this ord.er- 4) In view of the foregolng, Shri Guru, iearned counsel appearing for the petjtioner submits that nothing survives in thls petition. Accordingly, the petltlon disposed of^ 5) Consequentiy, I.A.Nos.1 & 2 aiso stand disposed of. Gowri,: Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge