gLTHE meg. 90W or JUDMIUEE AT BILasPua cmrxmsqaam smGLE g5 W wan PEHTION No. OF 2096 gEIIIIONEg. Muneshwar Singh Paikara,son of / Asharam Paikara, aged about 31 years, resident of village Nimha, Tah'. Ambikapur, Dist.Salguja (C. G) Vs. §§§gONDENI§ : 1. State of aqhattlsgarh through Secretary, r Panchayat & Welfare Department, D.K Bhawan Raipur( C. G) 2 Gutef Executlve fficer, Janpat Panchayai ‘ Lakhanpur, dist. Sarguga (C. G) 3 Village Pancha at N1mha,Block Lakhanpur d1st.bargu3a (C. G ERIT PETiTiON UNDER ABTIELE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION 01‘“ INBQgi‘g J G XI—HC—78 \ M ww,m,m woMk3§6§leL Dr. Shaiiesh Ahuja, Advoca1 Shri Scd'ish Gup‘m, Dy. EIOV‘ / advance copy. By The insfan'r pe‘ri‘fion The da‘red 3.5.2006 (Annexure P-10). Under Rule 3 of C.6. Panch The pefifioner is enfi'Hed 1'0 fiie r as such, fhe pefi‘l’ioner has effh and he shouid first exhausf fha? remedy. iismissed. Accordingly, The pefi‘l‘ion is i if The pefifioner fiies an a; same as eariy as passible. Consequen‘fly, M.(W.)P. No. 'e for The pe'ri'rianer. 1r. Adv. for fhe responden‘i's/Sfa‘i'e on pe‘ri‘rioner- has challenged The order- hya‘r (Appeai & Revision) Ruies, 1995 m appeui againsT The said order and :acious ai'remafive remedy avaiiabie )peai, Then 1'he 5.D.O. 1'0 decide The 2694/06 aiso sTands dismissed. i ,'\ Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judgei P.T.O. \ WW V 1T4; 200 WW<W) WWh‘WW ‘wmm mmwm éiwanéw 17.?.2G06