Him court w m 1L m. coma“ Lg/Ju mw A” JwMW‘ . < ' Twink; 857 :‘ of 19%; a bout ?’+ ywrs, am af Pkg my ”mmd ' I’mzwr T‘&d&r, ii/r) Post Gii‘iwg ‘ r iodahwn, Wya GuHL, m’mil mam Dzstmm 1mm {I‘ P ) V$3§Sugur I -b‘c's Hf yJTirbc’tm Pddi m3$i+u14m o ”i .Y‘ducmL e”; mtmrni‘ P‘s‘cr‘lct— / Petit ioner 4— Driled: K Um er 'Tmro‘ (P: 33 ). ? my mnaatr, Garjxm e ial I EdfidG" Sam‘s: 1"“? ) LawcEw 3. The neargtn Menomw Cnureh - ["113 Imm Tham‘mw Tel a1}. Wm EisWict Ramur (t 1?.) L» 'Me Chwhvnma of “dmdhinm Mam Cr Ui'j mmami‘l bchno‘ ulxgw ‘-{ ' Bnawd /0 Mrtin howit l B Pm; ”bamwti matricb wig , (N F.) - V . Wtitian undar Article“ 2?é/2?7 M + a cwvtz ita m? 1mm. mrtiiculaéra a) f patitianar .w :g ,1 m. _ . :- IGH COURI‘ OF CHHA‘TTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petihbn N0. 857 of 1996 single Bench : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Salish K. Apihotri. None for the peunoncr Shn P P Qahu, Advocatz for the respondent No 2 9w (5th Apn'l, 2006) Tm following order of the Court was passed by Satish K. mihoul, J. The matter was called for hearing twice. On both the weasbns, none appeared nor any representation was made on behalf of the pelit'mner. In view of the above, the petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution. Sdl- saash K Agmhom Judge Petitioner Dilcsh Kumar Dadar Versus Respondents Dy. Director Public lnsh'tute of Education and others