"Wfe. ; y.Jt,..^'-St:—s -B-I'W HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISQARH: BILASPUR Writ PetiSon i'S*i No. S850 of 2307 Sampat Lal, S/o. Late Shri Uttam Singh Parmeshwar, aged about 23 years, resident or vliiage Barekel, Post Pirda, Tahsil and Distriot Mahasamund (CG). Versus 1) The State of Chhattisaam, throuah the Secretan;', Tribal Weifare Department, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur(CX3). 2) The Coiieotor, fTribai Welfare), Mahasamund Oistnct Msn3S3fr!Und ^CG), 3) District Co-ordjnator, Triba! Weifare, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (CG). 4) Clstrict Education Offioer, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (CG). 5) Biook Education Offioer, Pithora, District Mahasamund (CG). (Writ Peiition under Artide 226 of the ConsSitutton or India) 18: Hon'&te Mr. Safisli K. Agnihotri, J. Present: Snri Rakesh Anthony, counsel for the petitioner. Shri V.V.S. Murthy, DepuSy Advocate General with Smt. Binu Sharma, Panei Lawyer for the respona'ents/State. ORAL OSOER (Passed on 23 -lanuarv. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submiis that the petittoner has made an applioation to the concemed authorities, but the same has not been considered so far. 2) Learned counsei appearing for the respondents/State submits that if the appiication of the petitioner is pending considerastion, the same shali be considered in accordanoe wfth the statutory provisions and Saw appSicabie to the f» case of the petittoner as eariy as possibie, preferably within a period of eight wseks from today. 3) In view of ciear categorical staiement made by the iearned counsei appearin.g for the respondents/authorities and according to the petitioner, nothing sun/ives in this mattsr. 4) Aocordingiy, the petition is djsposed ofwith the aforesaid obsen/ation. Raju Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge