C^ l^ IN THE HIGH COURT OFCHHATnSGARH AT BILASPUR fC.G.) W.P.fCVNo. ^Z^I /2010 PETITIONER : ^(S'.<..')^i- ^ -^'^ <^?.-' ..y".^.a \'^ ,..<^\ \<.^° ^'"\^-x €^>^ 'y RESPONDENTS '^^^ VERSUS 1. Pyare Lal Sahu aged about 37 years, S/o-Asjuram Sahu, former Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Kakedi, Block- Pathariya, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) R/o- Village- Kakedi, P.S. Pathariya, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department of Panchayat and Social Welfare/ D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Sub Divisional Officer, Mungeli, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) Chief Executive Officer, Pathariya, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) Sub Engineer, Rural Engineering Services, Pathariya, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Kakedi, Janpad Panchayat, Pathariya, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) Secretary, Gram Panchayat Kakedi, Janpad Panchayat, Pathariya, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) WRITPETITION UNDERARTICLE 226 OFTHE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. (^- / ^.( ^'. \^ [^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) N0.5231 OF 2010 PETITIONER Pyare Lal Sahu Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others RESPONDENTS (Writ Petition underArticle 226 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri P.K.C. Tiwari, Sr. Advocate with Shri B.L. Sahu, Advocate . for the petitioner. Shri Arun Sao, Govt. Advocate for the State. Shri Pankaj Shrivastava, Advocate for the respondent No.3. ORDER (ORAU (Passed on this 30th day ofAugust, 2011) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has made representations to the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Pathariya, on 5-8-2010 (Annexure — P/4) & 27-8-2010 (Annexure ~ P/5). Learned coynsel further submits that without deciding the same, the recovery certificate has been issued, though the same has not been given effect to till date. 3. At this juncture, learned counsel appearing tor the respondent No.3 submits that if the recovery certificate has not been given effect to, as the petitioner has not sought for quashment of the recovery certificate, the same shall not be given effect to till theaforestated representations of the petitioner are considered and decided, in accordance with law and on its own merits, within a period of 8 weeks. 4. In view of foregoing, according to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. ———— Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge