^' rcP, SINGLE BENCH W THB HONfBLS HIGH COURT OF CHffAmSGARH JUmCATURB AT BILASPUR W.P.fd NQ. M(6^ /2011 yBTXTIONER ^^€^^. ^'-••""'"^^ ^' Nemdas Manifepun S/0 Fwtadas Mcuvhpuri Aged dbout 81 years (^xupalwn Kotwar R/0 Viltage McmdirHasod Tahs3Aar<mgr Dist- Raipur (C.G.) RmSP0 DENTS: ^ WJ^SUB -(1) State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary , Department ofRevenue Mantralaya.D. K.S. Bhawan Raipur ( C.G.) (2) Collctor, Raipur Dist-Raipur (C.G.) /3; Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Raipur Dist Raipur(C.G.) / (4)Chief Executive Officer p^- > cS) New Raipur Development Authority TeUbandha Jedhi Vila Near Naiioanl Garage Ring Road Raipur Dist Raipur ( C.G.) ^ (5) NazulOfficer Capital Area Development Authority Raipur ( Chhattisgarh) ^<-<-.. WRIT PSTITION UNDSR ARTICLB 22C/227 OF TSB C0NSTITVTION OF INBSA 1**4^?»4« PETITJONER RES@ONDENTS HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) N0.41S5 OF 201 1 Nemdas Manikpuri Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition under Article 226/227 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Beneh : Hon'ble Shri Satish K.Agnihotri, J. Present:- Ms. DeepaM Pandey, Advocate fbr the petitioner. Shri Arun Sao, Government Advocate for the State. Shri Aman Kesharwani, Advocate on behaff of Shri Sumesh Bajaj, Advocate for the respondent No.4. ORDER<ORAU (PassedQnthjsQ1stciayofAu9ust:, 2011) 1t At the yery outset, tearned counsel appearing for the State respondente submits thatthe representations have been filed by the petitjoner before the Collector, Raipur, in the month of July, 2011. The Coltector is taking atl necessary steps to dedde the representation of the petjtioner expedjtiousjy, in accordance with the provisions of the orders of the Ideal Rehabilitation Policy of the Chhattisgarh State, 2007. Some reasonable time is required to do the needfujandassuch, this petition ispremature atthisstage. 2. Shri Sao, fairiy submits that the decision on the representation, as aforestated, shall be taken within three months after affording an opportunity of hearing to the respondent No.4. 3. !n view of foregoing, according to the tearned counsel for the petitioner, nothing survives for adjudicatjon. 4, Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the afore-stated obsen/ation. ! ^ Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri ^ Judge ashok