.^[ ^' \ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR IC.G WRIT PETITION N0. 2> 3 8 /2Q02 PETITIONER •«Q S. BHARPOOR SINGH GREWAL, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, SON OF LATE KARTAR SINGH GREWAL, RESIDENT OF B-23, JASPREET AUTOMOBILES, NEW BOMBAY MARKET, RAIPUR (CHHATTISGARH) ^-<? ^-•'A.^::'-!*-*" ^y" VERSUS ^ -'•^' ^ RESPONDENTS 1) 2) r^" ^ ^/ •, ^(1 ^•W U.-7 ,- /<^a% c'"ll; STATE OFCHHATTISGARH, THROUGH : THE SECRETARY (REVENUE) D.K.S. BHAWAN, RAIPUR(CHHATTISGARH) COMMISSIONER (REVENUE) BASTAR, DIVISION BASTAR, AT JAGDALPUR(C.G.) 3) COMMISSIONER (REVENUE), RAIPUR DIVISION, RAIPUR (CG) 4) COLLECTOR BASTAR, DISTT. BASTAR, JAGDALPUR (C.G.) 5) TAHSILDAR, JAGDALPUR, DISTT. BASTAR, CHHATTISGARH 1 ^- 2 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRJT. MANDAMUS. QRDER OR DIRECTIONS IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI PROHIBITION XI-HC-22 -3^[ '?7TR^P?, '^fl^TR, ^<ni^ ^ . f. N O • t5 l7PI^T'%^lt^^°<'":<"'"^"<<*"""<'<<""<<<t'^ 20° ^?/^5U "^-^-<8?' 3TT^T-^T K^T 3TI^I W^NT^f^T W^T'^TTW TTft^ m ^TH^!' ^ f^S I^TCTT "^ 3ti^' l3?T^T 12.07.2002 Shri V,K. Pandey, cousjsel for the petitioner. Shri Ranbir Singh, GA |br the respondent/State. Heaid. From the rccord it apF|ears that the petitioner had come up before this Court on an earlier occasion by way of Writ Petition No. 1310/2001, which was jdisposed of on 11/12/2001 m the followiag terms : <Iin fhe i|esult, fhis petition is disposed of w|ith a dircction that the case of fhe ^rit petitioner shall be j the Commissioner, Revenue, Bas^ar. The petitioner shafl approach Co^ximissioner^ Bastar by fiUng a represjentation wifhin 15 days from today togjefher wiffai a copy offhis order aad on Coxninissioner] treceipt of fhe same, the Revenue, Bastar shall Subsequent fhereto, rcpreseutation to fhe Commi^ proceed to djecide fhe matter afier giviag an oppojrtunily ofbeing heaid to the writ peti^ioner withia a further period ofnot l^iter fhaii 3 monfhs, The pet^tion is accordmgty disposed of. the petitioner had subxmtted a isioner, Bastar Division, Bastar, who U^^sa 1" T XI-HC-22 "s^ '^rraM^, '^:ftsT^, ^T^r^T fet^ oT^ ^RW?T?ta l^ t^t<m§raw^t^----®^------M20rf^- •f^^y' ^n^ F^TT^T ^rfN has disposed of fhe sakl rcj^resentatio: been observed tfaat as a judidial the Additional Comiidssioneii. tibie inatter. Thereafter, the Court by way of this writ petit|ion. It is stated by leam.e4 pendency ofthewrit petition proceedings for review of his heard on that question. ^N^T?fhT ^rm^ ^ ft^ ^R?R: ^T ^f^ 3TT^T rcsentation on 26/02/2002. It has order had already been passed by Raipur, he could not rc-appreciate petitioner has come up before fhis counsel for fhe State fhat during jthe Commdssioner icdtiated suo nioto order aad fhe petitioner has been In tiiis view of fhe m^tter, fhe petitioner is peraiitted to withdraw fhis writ petition wi^h liberty to file a fcsh petition, ifaa occasion so anses. The petition is disposed |of accordicigly. Certtfied copies aanexecij fhe counsel on beiag substitut^d Certified photocopy as p^r rules. to writ petition znay be returaed to by xerox/autfaenticated copies, ^^ Sd/- P.C. Naik Judge IT^' ^fe^ •^