mGH COURT OF CHHATTI8GARH AT BILASPUR PETmONERS WrttPeti«on(C)Na,7aS4of:»)W7 , 1. Smt. Premlata Tiwari, aged about 70 years WifeofShriK-D.Tiwari; 2. Sanjay Tiwari Son of Shri K.D. Tiwari, aged about 37 yeais; Both resident of VallaUinagar, Raipur District Raipur(CG). VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1 sahu Indira Priyadarshitu Mahila Nagrik Sahkari Bank Maiyadit, Sadar Bazar, Raipur (CG) (aow in liquidation), Throu^i: its Liquidator. 2. The QfBcial Liquidator, Indira Priyadarahini Mahil Nagrik SaMcari Bank Maryadit, Sadar Bazar,Raipur(CG). 3. The State of Chhattisgarii, Throu^hi: Its Secretary, Dqwriment of Cooperative Societies, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (CG). 4. The Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Raipur (WRFT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTTTUnON OF INDIA) (SB: Hon'bleMr.SatishK.A^rihotal.J.) Present : Shri R-aveen Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate fordiepetitiQners. Shri Vinay Harit, Deputy Advocate Gaieral for the State. OR'U.ORDER (Passed on 17al ofDecember, 2007) (1) Leamed counsel appeansg for Ifae petitioners submits that Ihe petiticmers have made a re(»-esentationto tte respoadent No. 2, to settle his dues an ^ 30.11.2007 (Amiexure P/2). Thereafter, the petitKKiers reminded again by letter dated 07.12.2007 (Annexure P/6). (2) Witfiout giving sufficient opportunityto the reqwndent No. 2 for deciding the representation aml passing an order, the petitioners have hastily ruAed to this Court for vwit ofmandmnus. (3) It is expedient tfaat tiie respondent No. 2 should decide Ifae representation of the petitioners in accordaaee wifli law, as expeditiously as possible, before takii^; any action vitadt may adversely affect the rights ofthe petitioners. (4) With the above observations, tfais petition stands disposed of. No order asto costs. ____——- Satish K. Agnihotn Judge HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH, BILASPUR Wrlt Petitioa ISt No. 7333 of 2007 PETITIONERS RESPOMDENT8 'f' 1 Philinon Minj, aged aboiit 54 years son of Late Dhepra Minj, workiug as Gangmaa, under P.W.D. - Kansabel, Distt. Jashpur (G.G.), R/o Vffl. And PO. Baudarchuwan, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) (year 1989) 8 Bajrat Ram Sai, aged ahoilt 52 years, son of Tilak Sai Ram, presentfy working as Gangman, under tlie P.W.D. - Kaasabel, R/o. viilage and Post Kansabel Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) (year 1989) 3 Bandu Raiu, aged ahoilt 51 years, sou of KIiasi'a Rain, working as Gaagman, under P.W.D.- Kansabel, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) R/o. Via Tatnbasingha Post Baudarchuwan, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) (year 1989) 4 Devsharan, aged a1'»oi]t50 years, son of Shri Ungul Sai, worknig as Gangnian, undcr P.W.D.- Kansabel, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) R/o. viUage Dodibahar, Post - Bandarchuwaa, Distt. Jashpiu- (C.G.) (year 1989) Versus 1 State of Ctlhattisgarh, throiigh the Secretaiy Department of Public Works, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawaa, Raipur (C.G.) Si Executive Enginecr, Piihlic Works Department, Division - Jashpur, Distt, Jashpur (C,G.) 3. Sub Divisional of&cer, Sub Uivision - Patthalgaon, Pilblic Works Department, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) WRIT PETITIOW UBDBR ARTICLB 2%6 QF THE CONSTITUTION OF IHDIA Appea'aace: Shri Vinod Tekaia, counsel for the petitioners. Shri Sumit Verma, Panel Laywer for the State/ respondents. ^ WP(S) No. 7525/2007 ^- ORAL ORDER J1S.12.2007} SUNIL KUMAR^SINHA. J. 1-Ieard. Learaetl counsel for the pRtitioTiers sziliinits that a permanent Gang-man is to be rctired at the age of 62 years in accordance with the Chhattisgarh. Shaskiya Revak (Adhwarshikl- Ayit) Adhiniyain. 7967read witb FiindaTnentaI Rllles, 5fi. Hc also subinits that the point raised has been dccidcd by this Conrt in batch ofinatters i.e. W.P.No. 108/2005 and many otTicr conTiected laatters on 04.01.3007, reported in 3007 (3) C.GJ,^J. 39 (GoolnjS & others Vs. Sttite of C.G.) and this matter is snuaiiRly covered by that decision, which may tae disposcrt ofon the same terms. Leamed coiinsel for the State fairly agn-es that this Tnatter is covered by the said decision. However, he siihniits that iii soine inatters fhe State has filed writ appeals. Unless somc interiin onder is passed, imerely on account of fUing of the writ appeal, liearing of this writ petitioii cannot be kept in abeyance, when the inatter is squarely covercd hy the said judginent. In the result, this petition is allowerl. Tt is disposed of in terms of the onler datcd 04.1.2007 passed in W.P. No. 108/2005 and other connected matters. No orier as to costs. Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge vatti