HIGHCOlffn-OFeHHATnSQARHHBILASPUR PETITIONER: RESPONDENTS: Writ Petition (Cr.) No.6212of 2008 Amin Meman, S/o Mlohd. lsmail,aged about 37 yeara, R/o Power House Road, Korba, Tahsil &Distt. Korba (C.G.) Versus 1. State of Chhattlsgarh Through the Secretary, Department of Home Affairs, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Director Genef&l of Police, Poltee Headquarter, Civll Lines, Raipur, Distt. Ralpur (C.G.) 3. The Inspector General of Police, Korba Division, Civil Lines, Bitaspur, Distt. Bilaspur 4. The Superintendait of Police, Korba, Distt. Korba (C.G.) 5. The OfFteer In-charge of Police Station Kotwali, Korba, Distt. Korba (C.G.) 6. The Collector, Korba, Distt. Korba (C.G.) {Writ petition under Articles 225 & 227 of the Constitution of India} Present: Mr. Arvind Kumar Dubey, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Rakesh Kumar Jha, Deputy Govt. Advocate for the State/ respondents. Sinale Bench: Hon'ble Mr. T.P. Shamna. J ORAL ORDER (21-7-2010) 1. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the order impugned dated 22-10-2(X38 passed by the District Magistrate, Korba in Criminal Case No.3/2008, whereby leamed District Magistrate has dismissed the application flled on behalf of the petitioner for preliminary hearing of the case on the ground of its mainfainability. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that externment proceeding under Sections 3 & 5 of the Chhattisgarh Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1^0 has been initiated against the petitioner in which the petitioner filed reply and has also filed applicatlon for preliminary hearing of the case relating to maintainability of the proceeding which was dismissed by the District Magistrate, Korba on the ground that it will delay the proceeding. fc ^^^^.^^s*s^^ uBtS'ps^??^^^ Leamed counset further submits thar~any-~~SppliGatton relating to maintainability of the proceeding must be heardand decided before further proceeding of the case, birt the District Magistrate has not considered the application of the petitioner for such hearing. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the petition and submits that the District Magistrate has dismissed the application flledon behalf of the petitioner, but has provided opportunity of taking such defence at the time of adducing his defence in the proceedlng. •^ 4. Order impugned and the appllcation for preliminary hearing of fhe case reveal that the petitioner has fited application retating to maintainability and continuance of the proceeding pending before the District Magistrate, Korba. If the proceeding is not maintafnable before the authority concemed then therewould not be any cause for continuance of such proceeding. In these circumstances, the authority was under obligation to hear and decide the question of maintainability before proceeding to decide the case on merits. Leamed District Magistrate while dismisang the application has committed illegality and such order is not sustainable under the law. 5. Consequentty, the petition is allowed and the order dated 22-10-2008 passed by the District Magistrate, Korba in Criminal Case No.3/2008 is hereby set aside. The District Magistrate, Korba shall provide opportunity of hearing to the petitioner on the applrcation for preliminary hearing fited on behalf of the petitioner and decide the application afresh. The petitioner is directed to present himsetf before the Dlstrict Magistrate, Korba on 9th August, 2010 for further progress of the case. No order as to costs. ___—— Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge 1: II! Y^