•-0 . fr . --' ' IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF GHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR W.P.r227)NO. "2>ai%'^- /2011 t PETITCONER APPELLAIstT ^^y^ ^.-^§s^^' ^(As*w •^^•sv ^sn' RESPONDENTS Non-A^pli^ant No. 1 Non-ADplicant No. 2 ^ Smt. Budhmati, W/o Jhulan, aged about 55 years, caste-Satnami, (Sarpanch of 6ram Panchayat, Hirri) R/o Village Hirri, Block- Sarangarh, Distt. Raigarh (C.6.) VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through Colleetor, Raigarh, bistt.- Raigarh (C.G.) 2.. Additional Collector, Raigarh Distt.-Raigarh (C.6.) .-3. Sub Divisional Officer/ Prescribed Authority,Sarangarh, Distt. Raigarh (C.6.) 4. Shri Resham Lal Koshale, S/o Asha Ram aged about 60 years (panch) 6ram Panchayat 1-firri, R/o Village - Hirri, Bfock Sarangarh, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) 5. Sampat Lal, S/o Saheb Ram (General Public) aged about 50 years, R/o Village - Hirri, Block Sarangarh, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) Non-Applicant No.3 6. Maharu Jolhe, S/o Baldev Jolhe, aged about 55 years, R/o Village- Hirri, Block Sarangarh, Distt. Raigarh (C.&.) • WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTETUTION OF INDIA. ^ sC-^\ i'®'p~ <j?^ .? 3a-HC—78 75T ^wwi, w-^wi'c, wwvy. ...tO..'.f.:.Aa.'L)..l^.;...31^1 •^" sn^T'q^T (''ipi^s??) 3TT3M W ^W T;lSiT 3TR5T S^f 'renw Tifta 3?i^i SB: Hon'ble Shri Manindra Mohan 3 25-07-2011 bl/ 8)V Shri Pushpendra Kumar Patel, Shri Arun Sao, Government on advance copy. This petition has been fited 6/7/2011 (Annexure P/1) passed petjtioner's claim for stay of opera^ been dismissed. Learnedcounsel for the p Officer passed an order or removal proper opportunity of hearing. it is| appiication for grant of stay ignorin^ out on account of illegaiity highii^i Coilector by rejecting the applieatj which has resuited in manifest injusl vide order dated 6/7/2011 , tht lagainst the order of removat ha^ detailed consideration of the |respondents in the appeal. The (}i Isubmissions also in support of |Coliector rejecfteq the application b^ Inotice, which was served to him| [appeared before the authority, did counset for the petitioner. ^dvocate for the State/respondents 1 to 3 hiahiidhted +l<<[<?1<il-1 tIPTOf 4^6 <[:»1«{1< iiaffinsn^r hrivastava. <J. the petitioner aggrieved by order dated the appellate authority by which the ion of the order appeaied against, has petitioner submitted thai the Sub-Divisionai of the petitioner wiihout giving due and |submitted that the Coliector rejected the that a strong prima facie case is made in the appeal and even that the |on, has committed patent error of taw (tee to the petitioner. i^ petitioner's application for grant of stay been rejected by the Collector after made by the petitioner and rtetltioner was aliowed to submit written application for grant of stay. The recordina that the petitioner was aiven and thereafter, the petitioner though rtot submit her repiv on the date fixed ror suymissions hls agpnf BABisBAuqg ueqo]^ BJpuiuB^ -/PS / Wl?r SE uoos se pue Aisnoiijpsdxs pspiosti lesdae sqi 'jeASMOH 'jopaiioo a4} Aql peUIIOUI }OU UJB 1 'SJ013J941 'espU! ^o uo| jspun uoipipsunf AjosiAjedns p ssiojs^ eqi ui jojjs iseiiueui AUB jo A)!|e69i|i }UBA3|9JJ! uo psseq jou asjeAjea sq 01 aqi ^oajaj 01 japjo ui joioajioo SMI s!4i 'pessed SBM jspjo syi ejoisjeyi A<!l tt^itehBite^. >l?»toJ-»pi&j jt ]Uhlh l.[bU]bl<te •eiqissod eq iieys jsuoiijiaci 941 Aq pajij psssed japjo sui yijM sjeua^u! 01 (tnusuoo s^ 10 izz uoiioas sioilJV 1:9 Ul 80U3J9US1U! EuiIUeilEM J9DJO leiuoipipsunf Aue puy }QU op i •syoiiejepisuoo ^jesdde jeyusu AB}S JQJ uoiteoiidde speiu uoiiejspisuoo sioBi euiud fss^ep tusnbesqns uo pue 6uue9u 'b B^ueBai&uMiaA ildssQ IblhtB 1^1 Ifeti ^t-y ut tt^us >bC|b1f,) ibkhllS^IIC. , QQZ .'ktt.....................y...^......|...........J / ^^JIs;"'""o^"^^?j"'^CT" iSttU^ Mtii^. 'h-Wlklh^ fe£. 84—3H-K