IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARH) w.P.(C) No.71”? Of 2009. Jamil Ahmad, S/o. Shri Khalil Ahmad, aged about 52 years, R/o. 8 Shivaji Nagar, Supela, Bhilai, District Durg (Chhattisgarh) Versus RESPONDENTS (:1) State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Law 85 Legislative Department, D.K.S Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) :2) District Judge, Durg, District Durg (Chhattisgarh) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA / HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH '. BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) NO.7178 OF 2009 PETITIONER Jamil Ahmad Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh & Another (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of india) Singie Bench : Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri H.B. Agrawai, Sr. Advocate with Shri Pankaj Agrawai, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri N.N. Roy, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on this 28‘hday of June, 2010) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the impugned order dated 10-9-2009 (Annexure P-8) and 24-10-2009 (Annexure P-11) have been passed without assigning any reasons. The dispute involved in the present case is squarely covered by the order dated 16—11-2009 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.5363 of 2009 (Mahanand Mishra Vs. State of C.G. & Others) . 2. Shri Roy, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State, submits that thef'present case may also be disposed of in terms of the order passed in Mahanand Mishra (supra). 3. ln view of foregoing, having regard to thesubmission of the learned counsel for the parties, it appears that the present petition is similar to that of Mahanand Mishra (supra). Accordingly the petition is / allowed. The impugned order dated 10-9—2009 (Annexure P—8) and 24-10—2009 (Annexure P-11) stand quashed and the State/ respondent is directed to consider the case of the petitioner on its own merits, in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders. Sdl— 2 SatishK Agriitmtrt ('2 , ‘ : (Judge x Gowri