^) V . ic . IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR W. P.(S) No. ^kl^ OF 2011. PETITIONER Manharan Kumar Tiwari, S/o. late Shri Devi Dayal Tiwari, aged about 54 years, Accountant, Block Education Office Patan, District Durg (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS ^~ y ^ ^yy '^s^y^ y' n ^<w^y ..•• ;^<"^.v ^/^ ^-y^' ."-• ^ ^Sf&\ y<^°'^:%x : 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Secretaiy, School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C. G.) 2. Director, Directorate Public Instruction Chhattisgarh, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3. District Education Officer, Durg, District Durg (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA i"3!ia.. ».,.,--f«a^E 1 '<i|g0issi|i' ?. SB : HON'BLB MR. JUSTICB PKITINKER DIWAKER W.P.fSJ.NP. 6703/2011 MaahaTan Kumar Twari versiis State of ChIiattisRarh &, Others Shri Soiakaat Verma, counsel fer fhe petitioner. Shri N.Naha Roy, P.L. for the State. WKJT PBTITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OFTHE COWSTITUTION (16.11.2011) Counsel for fhe petitioner submits that at fhis stage, he may be permitted to withdraw tbis petition as bis representation (Annexure P/7) for granting hiui salaxy is pending. He however subiaits fhat direction be issued to fhe respondent No.2 to decide the pending representation offhe petitioner. State counsel submits that fhe representation of the petitioner would be decided ia accordance with law if ab-eadv not decided. He furfher subinits that if the petitioner is legally entifled for bis salary then bis case would be considered. Accordingly, the petitioner is permitted to wifhdraw this petition. Needless to state fhat fhe respondent No.2 shaU decide fhe representation of fhe petitioner if ah-eady not decided, ia accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. In view ofabove, the petition is disinissed as wifhdrawn. It is inade clear that this court has not expressed any opiaion on-the merits of the case and the authority concemed wouM be at liberty to decide fhe representation strictly in a.ccordance witb law. Sd/- PritinSter Diwaker .Judge