,/7 ^ •^ |G07 1/-^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ^gl.. W.P.(C)No. : /2009 PETITIONER tr'.-o ^^ ^a" ^^^>" ^ ^-- RESPONDENTS 1). Smt Chandra Narayan Das, aged about 80 years, W/o Late H. Narayan Das, R/o Shop No. 11, Civic Centre, Bhilai - Dist Durg (Chhattisgarh) though her General Power of Attorney holder Shri Hemant Bamwani, aged about 43 years, S/o Late Shri H.Narayan Das, R/o Shop No 11, Civic Centre, Bhilai - Dist Durg (C.G.). VERSUS 1). Steel Authorityof India Ltd., Bhilai Steel Plant, registered under Indian Companies Act of Government of India with its Head Quarters at Ispat Bhawan, L.odhi Road, New Delhi, through the Managing Director, Bhilai Steel Plant, (S.A.I.L) Bhilai (C.G.). s^«*^" 2). The Chief Town Administrator, Bhilai Steel Plant (S.A.I.L.), Bhilai (C.G.) 3). Sunil Kumar Daga, S/o Late Vithaldas Daga, aged about 48 years, R/o Shop No. 12, CivicCentre, Bhilai, (C.G.) PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226, ^ OF THE CONSTITUTION QF^INDIA I) PARTICULARS OF HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) N0.2281 OF 2009 Petitioner Smt. Chandra Naravan Das Versus Respondents Steel Authority of India Ltd. & Others WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226, 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (SB : Hon'bte Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J.) Present:- Shri HarshWardhan, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri B.D. Guru, Advocate for the responctent No.1 & 2. Shri Shashank Thakur, Advocate for the respondent No.3. 2. ashok ORDER (ORAU (Passed on 31st day ofAugust, 2010) Shri Guru, learned counset appearing for the respondent No.1 & 2 submits that the sole grlevance of the petitioner is that his representation/ application dated 14.11.2007/ 16.11.2007 was rejectedwithout stating reasons and application of mind. Shri Guru further submits that the respondent No.1 & 2 may be permitted to reconsider again the representation/applteation dated 14.11.2007 /16.11.2007, in accordance with law and pass the detailed reasons after affording an opportunity of hearing to all the concerned parties. Shri Harsh Wardhan, leamed counsei appearing for the petitioner submits that since this Coyrt directed status quo as obtained on 04.05.2009 in respect of the petition's scheduled land, the same may be maintainedtitl disposal of the application ofthe petitioner. Shri Guru submits that there is no objection and the status quo as directed by this Court on 04.05.2009 would be maintained till the dlsposal of the application of the petitioner, as aforestated. In view of foregoing, nothing survives for adjudication in the petition. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Safish K. Agnihotri Judge .—,_