IN THE fflGH COURT OF CHHATISGAKH AT BILASPUK (C.< W.P.NO. ^fc^S PETmONER NON-APPLICANTNO. 2 ^ ^"'^ \4-r'€^ /v^^^' v^ .^y" t4S-" <«<"&. \:..< •^^ v^.^ w•ff- VIJAY KUMAR BHATIA S/o. Late Sugnamai Bhatia Occupation - Business Aged about 42 years R/o. Sanjay Nagar, Sindhi Colony, Chakradhar Nagar, Raigarh(C.G.) Versus BESPONDENTS APPLICANTNO. 1 1. SURESHKUMARJAGATRAMKA S/o. Banwarilal Jagatramka Aged about 51 years Occupation- Business & Advocate R/o. Gandhi Chowk, Raigarh (C.G.) APPLICANTN0.2 2. SANDEEP KR. JAGATRAMKA S/o. Suresh Kumar Jagatramka Aged about 20 years Rf'o. Gandhi Chowk, Raigarh (C.G.) NON-APPL. N0. 1 3. STATE OF CHHATISGARH Through Collector, Raigarh (Chhatishgarh) 496001 NON-APPL. N0. 3 '^•~^-;<-a- ^ ^:« ^--L ''':?^<"'', 4. MAHESHKR. JAGATRAMKA S/o. Banwarilal Jagatramka Aged about 57 years 129/C, Karl Marx Sarani, Kolkata-700023. c^^ tB»"!Tn-^r-TiT' •V-'l , ,..,^lffB WBIT PETITION UNDER ABTICLE 226 & 227 OP CQNSTITGTION OP INDIA & isa 'g?^ Vc'g-. i?^ Bl as ir-^^^ ^^Si » Kf 61 K1; XI-HC-22 sn^r^ir l^tRiSn^T <v' ''w^fgg' ^r ;)C 4'. \UT Soma 3ST '<li<)iwil, ®^l+f'16,f°ic1iyy sn^T SHITW (rf^cT h^s Mr. Vipin Punjabi, counsel fcfl Mr. Ravi Ranjan Sinha, Panj Heard both the counsel on ^ The petitioner has preferred] of the Constitution of India, be\!\ passed by the District Judge, R^ petition pending in the Court of 4 The petitioner herein is noil and he is duly represented. He h^ without effecting service on non-afj Mahesh Kumar Jagatramka, the \ petitioner herein is duty re; raise obiection before the District with law. He has no locus standi and to file this petition. Therefore, 1 do not find any liable to be dismissed, and it is stage itself. Consequently, M.(W.)P.No: disDosed of. ipresen1|ed Jlud 'sbl'lltd41-f 41HcfTH'tet:fl'<.l"IWI<, ^isrf^Tsn^r ir the petitioner. 3l Lawyer for tfae State'respondent No.3. dmission. this writ Detition under Articles 226 & 227 ig aggrieved by order dated 18-7-2005, igarh, in the petition to transfer revision \dditional Sessions Judge, Raigarh. i-applicant No.2 before the District Judge raised grievance in this writ petitlon that iplicant No.3 (respondent No.4 herein) i.e. :ransfer application is being heard. The before the District Judge and he can udge in transfer application, in accordance in raising grievance about a third person, substance in this writ petition, the same is accordingly, dismissed, at the admission 13090/2005 and l.A.No.6925/2005 stand Sd/- L-c- Bhad Judge (q^^i-) a'