Kr©!-fCOURT OFCHHATnseARH AT BILASPUR ^ WritPetifion ?5) No. 3870 of 2008 Petitioner Arjun Sam, 5/o. Lute Amar 5ay, ,4qed about 32 years, Ccste - Harijan, R/o. Vitlage Lakhanpur, Tahsil Surujpur, bistt. Surguja (C.6.). Versus Respondents 1. The Chi'ef Executiye Officer, Jsnpcsd Ponchciyist - BhQ'yEi'tt'cy!, Tat-iai! - 5urojpur, Distt. Surguja (C-6.-) ^. Janpad faicriaysT - BhasyaThai, bistrict - Surguitt, TTirough the Chief Executive Officer. 3. The Coll£ctQr. District Surou's (C.&) 4. 5'tute of 0-ihattisgarh, Through the SscrsToiry, Psinchsyat & Ruro! Development Department; &.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.6.) WRIT pFrrroN UNDER APTICLE 226 OF THE CON57HUTIQN W INDI.4. SirgSe Beneh : Hon'bie Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri. J. ^ h i 3 !31SBiSS8(; 1. 5hri AshoR K. Shukb, AdvOCute for the pe-i-itioner. Smt. Smitha 6hsi, Panel Lawyer fup the respondents No. 3 and 4. ORAL ORDER (Psssed on this 21 day of Juiy, 2008) With the consent of the nppesring parties, -rtie matter ia henrd finuiiy. t^eamed counsel uppearing for the petitiorier subiriita thut t'ne Chiaf Executive Officer, Janpud Panchsyat, Bhuiyathan, Tahsil and bistrict Surguja has been dir-ected by the Coliector vide interim order ciuted 2.1.2008 (Annexure P/4). stuying ihe order dated 27.11.2007, passed by ti-ie authority below. whsr-e.by the petitioner has to be reinstated in sar-vice. L^ ...t- ^^ veg' ^???g?<-;; 3. ThAur 8e that as it irioy, it is for -t-he CoSiector to ensure that his orcter- is coinpiied with. Ti-iis Court in exercise of ita juriscjiction under- Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not inclinec! to oass an ordar enajr-ing -riie compliance of the "Srder passed by the Cuilector. The Coiiector is comDetent to ensur^ comDiiance of his ome.r- In view of the foregoing, this petition is (iismissed, sumniariiy. Sd/- Satish K.Agnihotri Judge •^ 'o