CHHATTiSGARH : utftntE 'B tu^a 1 •lON'i .Ihtu'ari?i—"iw^i ^BSu^itaaE'^ii ^ Iri^ Writ.PetJtion No.2135 of. Ganesh Dutt Mersha, SonofJ.P. SvSersha, Aged about 43 years, Occupation : Practising Lav.'yer, Resident of Mandir Chowk, Jarhabhata, Bi'aspur, Dlsfrict Biiaspur. Chattisgarh. Versus 1. Untof! of indis Through the Secretary, Ministry of Law and Jusiice, NewDslhi-110001 2. Deiimitation Commission of India Nirwachan Sadan, Ashoka Road, NewDeihi 110001 3. The State of Chhattisgarh Through the Chlef Secretary, D.K.S. Bha.wan, Mantrata.ya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh t-*i Present: Shri M.D. Dhote, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.K. Beriwai, leamed- Standing Counsel for Union of india/respondent No. 1. Shri A. S. Gaharwar, leamed counse! for res. Mo. 2. (Passed on 30th Augusf, 2006) The foilowina ora! order of the Court was oassed bv S.R. Nayak, CJ. In this wrlt petl'tion, the petitioner has sought for quashing of the draft proposal 'A'here under Ra'garh Pariiamentary Constituency has been atlocated to Scheduled Caste ssat in the p!acs of existing Biiaspur Parliamentasy Constituency which is reserved for Scheduied Caste. Notifscation in the exereise of the oower conferred undsr Section 9 (2~) (d) of the Delimitation Act, 2002 (for short "the Act") has been issusd !§Si •:»'•::"•''•"^ ^;!'*.;;::^:^.^^ under sub-Section (1) of Section 10 of the Act and the same was pubiished sn the Gazette dated 02nd June 2006. In that view of the matter and having regard to the provisions of sub-Section (2) of Section 10 of the Act as wel! as Article 329.af the Constltution of india. we decline to entertain this writ petition. Accordingly, it is dismissed. No costs. Sd/- ChiefJustice Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge WM^S-