C§€<§N6Zq/ ; K1§ gym mgxm name muggx mg. Bm‘ci'g smwg Ammggzmgxvg .maum: §M.P.1.' maxing: 0.5.no i;2w 1997' ‘9- G.R.BE&.GAT9AGED mom: 51 YMR$~:,a/0 8mm Lm. ° mmm, as 3U :DY .mmw TJ‘ OR? q T DEPART ._ T Kommgom (Gwgsmé (my .g h § OtatlsouQAPLIcA T ~Veraus— 1)smTE 0? mum PRADES H; TKROUGHwEcRETLM nEmaT MEM m 1? oaEsT , VA LmB H B mum ,3 Horn. (M.P . ) . 2 )P qc In CF 0 F OREST DEPARTMT,BHOPAL, 5mm cousmvuon wq MREST cIRcLE M.NK§£,BASTAR(M.P.), 4)SBRI SAKm RAM {{AG occmm “GER ,F onEsm DEPARTWT,E§IPUR (31.9. V ) . tuaooctoqR§5P0§m£§ giggly; w mg; Pmx'ugg 1, PARmULAgSJ? Tm, wIGANT: ' Aa above; 2. PAaTIcvLQLg;_gm;;_g§§§9_N2§N_g§ s As above. 5. PkRTIGULhR$ W Tim] ORDER AGAINST ggH Tm APPLIGATIwMAn§£m The VagEL1¢ation is made against the following ml. §qf$ "W: anCtSlJ. .Ci.3..7../.-2..9.p.§._ marmvwaaa) mark-ximamw F120 mfmhi W#R€@W1§n aw§qanésr SB: HON’ 22.02.2010 When the matter was the peu'tioner and the matte: BLE SHRI MANINI shn' Arvind Dubey, P No. 1, 2 an 3. None for respondent Nr Earlier a fixed date S} no one appears for the petiti his behalf, the petition is dis1 call, none appears for the pei“ aner and no representation 1's made on missed for want ofprosecution. 'RA MOI-IAN SHRIVASTAVAuL '(ralled out for hearing, Even on the second 'tioner nor any rep el Lawyer for the Statelrespondents none appears for was passed over. resentation is made. L4. .C. was issued to the petitioner. Since ‘ Manilidra Mdliaii'Shrwastava Sm“ a. 1 ‘ ‘ Judge