c -<^^. \0° IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATUREOF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITON N0. A^^~^ / 2005 PETITIONER:- Shikchan Prasarak \°>1 . ^^^) -^s^ ^^^e^- y -. ^^ >^ ..^ " .^(^\P Mandal Beed Through Suhas .^^y Kadam S/o BaUram Kadam Aged ^ about 26 years, Occupation - Assistant Professor R/0- VIP Road, Raipur, District'- Raipur C.G.) ^yy- ^\\..-' ^^v RESPONDENTS A VERSUS .1) State of Chhattisgarh Through;- Secretary Department of Agriculture D.K.S. Bhawan Mantralay Raipur 2) Vice Chancellor Indira Gandhi ^ Krishi Vishwavidyalay Krishak Nagar Raipur (C.G.) /3) Registrar Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalay Krishak Nagar Raipur (C.G.) 4) Chairman Board of Management Indira Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalay Krishak Nagar Raipur (C.G.) ^ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. ..J-. /T^l^-£k__t''V£k.4^L'i--Ir^f-»-^ XI-HC-22 3;n^r^r f^N)'3n^r ^n^^rf?cT 3^ '<<|<<|<V<<(, ^xfl^l^, (^dlt<^< |I^IM5|Ch _ / _w y-^'^22^/^^ *i i*fl^i iffi+iicn ---'------- ^ ^QQ ^^.......:............. ^n^T^TTW^cT 14-9-2005 Mrs< Hamdda Mr. R.R.Sinha, fhe respondeiit N Sid<|liqui»coiiasel for fhe petitioBer, P^nel Laswyer takes obfice cra behalfof I^.l/State. petitton, By thtewrit propriety and correctness of P-1) and dated 2-8-2005 capacily of fhe students ha^ condition has been miposed fide residents of Chliatdsga^h ordered that fhere will be no The counsel foxl restotictions were not unpose^ miposing these restrictions be difficult to fhe petitioner t|: and the financial iaterest ofl The comisel for fhe representation has already Registrar oftiieUniversity the Boaid of Managenieiit directed to decide fhe period of7 days, The request appeara to be just, fair axid ^rota^wraf^'te^t^^K ^sri^Tsn^T peti4on, fhe petitioner has qpiestioaed the jthe orders datel 4-8-2005 (Aimexurc [^xuiexure P-2), whereby the iatake been reduced fix>xii 96 to 48 aad a |fhat oiily the stadents who are bona be adinitted aiid it ha& ^lso been 4nanagem®ntseat fhe petitioiier sufomits ftot fhese at fhe time of fhe aflffliatioii and by ic petitioner feels aggrieved as it will get fhe required liumber of studeats fhe petitioner shaU also be affected, p^tttkmer furfher subiaiits IIhat a been made by tlie petitioner to tihe the saiae requires consideratioa by Therefore, the respoiideiit No.4 be repi^sentation of fhe petitioner withio. a m^de by fhe counset for Itie petitioxier Jreasonable, fherefore, the respoiMleiit p4;tltioi aid XI-HC-22 3;^'<F*iNi<i*i, t?Tn<i<ifi, ^rrey ^ft'^^A- ^TTOWSRW^^'^lLlll^^ 11111^' ^[ 200 i^s' 3TI^T^T f^lt^3TI^T $h^i<t)^cT G.Smgh ( ? ^' 3TI^T^<TTW^f^T No,4 is directed to decide fh^ considering fhe pomts raised a period of 7 (seven) days petition staads disposed of Certified copy as representatioa of fhe petittoiier ^ter Ifherein ia accoidanc^ wifh law wifhia fijom today, On fbe above temis^ fhe <=bN[<n4i^ <4i^<vtT^te^<Ri^« ^^rf^T^TT^T perrules. Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge (4^^^)