gingle Bench ) @j \w}+ * ® BFFORF THE HON’BLE HIGH COU T OF CHHATTISGAR AT BILASPUR W.P. s No. 3% zoo / Sudhanshu Diwan, S/o Shri Ram Nihal, Aged about 52 years, Working as Assistant Professor (Department Of Sociology), in Government College Bagbahara, District — Mahasamundj‘, R/o H.No 19/91, Nea Canal, Club ?ara, Mahasamund, District i Mahasamund LO C9$ Versus / 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through its Secretary, Department of Higher Education, D.K.S. 1 Bhav‘an, Raipur (C.G.) Director Higher Education Directorate, Government of CG DKS Bhavan, ' Raipur (CG) Principal, Government College Bagbahara, 1 District Mahasamund (C.G.) Respiondents (/7 2. 3. ‘ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA @ H Petitioner r @ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR single Bench : Hon’ble Mr; Justi e Pritinker Diwaker 1 1 l \ ‘ Writ Petition (S) No; 430 of 2009 ' \ v § ‘ _ Mr Manlsh Sharma counéel for the petitioner Mr Y S Thakur Dy Advocate General forthe State ‘WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE ‘ CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ' 0 R D E R ’ (12 08 2009) With the consent of the parties,ithe matter is heardfinany. Counsel forthe petitioner submits that the question of law involve‘d in the presentlcase is squarely covered by various ecisions of the Madhya‘ Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal and copies of two such orders are tiled as Annexure P-4. He urther submits that in view of the settled law, at this stage the etitioner may be permitted to withdraw the present petltion with iberty to fle a representation before respondent No 1 He l owever submits that the direction may be issued for deCIding the ‘ -epresentation of the petitioner expeditiously To this prayer of i' ounsel for the petitioner, counsel for the State has no objection. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn i ith the liberty as aforesaid. l lf the petitioner makes a i epresentation within a period of three weeksfrom the date of eceipt Of the copy of this order, the same is expected to be _ decided by the authorities concerned within a further period of " ‘ hree months from the date of its receipt strictly in accordance ‘ With law in the light of the aforementioned decisions of the ' . Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal 'Sd/— Pritinker Diwaker Judge : i I i d f l p h ‘r c w r r t bETITl0NER I Sudhansh Diwan i Versus REsPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh & others.