0, b9 Sk §= ’ 15 ite (N IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUHC.GJ wm'r PETITION 110.1% g€ [2004 PETITIONERS 1. RAGHAVENDRA MISHRA, SON OF / SHRI R.P. MISHRA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, CONSTABLE NO. 145, PRESENTLY POSTED AT RS. CHAWNI, BHILAI, DIST’I‘. DURG (CHHATTISGARH) RAMNARESH TIWARI, SON OF SHRI RAM BADAN TIWARI, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, CONSTABLE NO. 312, PRESENTLY POSTED AT RS. OLD BHILAI, DISTT. DURG (CHHATI‘ISGARH) KISHORE SINGH, SON OF SHRI NANHE SINGH, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, CONSTABLE NO. 1188, PRESENTLY POSTED AT P.S. OLD BHILAI, DISTRICT DURG (CHI-IATTISGARH) DEVI PRASAD, SON OF SHRI RAMCHARAN, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, CONSTABLE NO. 170, PRESENTLY POSTED AT P.S. OLD BHILAI, DISTRICT DURG (CHHATTISGARH) VIRENDRA SHARMA, SON OF LATE SHRI R.L. SHARMA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, CONSTABLE NO. 254, POSTED AT JAMUL, DISTRICT DURG (CHHA'I‘TISGARH) DHRUV SINGH, SON OF SHRI KIRATH SINGH, AGED ABOUT 4O YEARS, CONSTABLE NO. 256, POSTED AT JAMUL, DISTRICT DURG (CHHA’I‘TISGARH) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH : THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCE AND PENSION, THIRD FLOOR, LOKNAYAK BHAWAN, KHAN MARKET, NEW DELI-II. n / , 2 2. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH, THROUGH SECRETARY, DEPARI‘MENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL (MP) THE STATE OF CI-IHATTISGARH, v THROUGH SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, MANTRALAY, RAIPUR (c.G.) 4. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, RAIPUR, CHHATTISGARH / 5. A THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, (PERSONNEL) RAIPUR, CHHATTISGARH. OF THE SUPERJNTENDENT POLICE, DxSTT. DURG (ca) M/ 22? WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRI IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS, CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION AND FOR OTHER SUITABLE WRIT OR WRITS, ORDER OR ORDERS, DIRECTION OR DIRECTIONS. @ 39 XI-—22 HC ww,m,%ww w-w. Me- 468é/vl] mm.. ................... 1H 200 m \ - “#fx XI-HC-22 to the respondents on The notices were issuec. 17. 1.2005 and the respondent: dispute the fact as they have not respondents No. 1 and 3 to In View of the foregoing the 6 are directed, to give eEect to the order dated 7.3.2003 (Annexure P/ 1) and if the petiu'o so far, within a period of’15 day copy of this order. With the above direction, t of nnally. There shall be no order In view of the above order M(W)P No. 4982/2004 and I.No. 93 16/ 2004 stand disposed of. Salish K. Agnihotti Judge L are not in a position to nled any reply till date. ners have not been relieved s mm the date of receipt of his petition stands disposed as to costs. Sd/— " ‘ Memes