^^ s^fli'^US^»^BI"?B; !is'B>RIS'SS?W 0 ; (f< sina^ ® ISLTHE HIGHCOURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR W.P. N0. ^Sf /2004 PETITIONER \f^ -^yy v^^- . ^y^A .' -W/"!^'l~>^ • .^ ^RESPONDENTS : w Shyamu Jaiswal aged about 26 years, S/o. Late Shri Parmatma Prasad Jaiswal, R/o. Hardi Bazar, Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, Through: The Secretary, Government of Chhattisgarh, Department of Home Affairs, DKS Bhawan, Mantralaya^ Raipur, Chhattisgarh The District Magistrate, Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh The Superintendent ofPplice, District Korba, Chhattisgarh WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1. PARTICULARS ABOUT THE PETITIONER: As mentioned above inthe cause title of the petition, 2. PARTICULARS ABOUT THE RESPONDENTS: As mentioned above in the cause title of the petition. 3. PARTICULARS ABOUT THE ORDER AGAINST WHICH THE PETITON IS BEING MADE: A. i. CaseNo. .: 11/2004 ii. Date : 02/12/2004 iii. Issued by : District Magistrate Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. A copy of the show X-HG—78 3~^"MNiy<<,^ttlwie,f:Ricira'^:. ^..^^^...yj,^^ •3:II^?T'(R^ (' y) »T1^P^T K-Wsh ^ (T? ^^t sh-fflc^ ^i<<?<C1:^ ^fHC'ft* ^T' fs^TTf^^l't ^aifiwsn^t tl-1-; Shri ^Ronbii" Sihgh, counse Shri Sumcsh Bajaj; |fbr •t+ie petitionef. ^eputy 0ovt. Achrocate for the State/f'e^ponclents. The petittoner has "pr^ferred tiiis petition tinder Articte 226/227 df tke Consti+utionl propriety and corr'ecfffess of^ issued by the District Sectipns 3, 5 and 8 of the Gh| 1990, Annexure-P/1. I have heard ledmecl coui admission of this petition. Learned counsel for the| cause notice has been issued b| mind and the show cause nofit^ of IncUa que3tionin9;; •tlle legality, ^ show cause notice ddted 2-12-2004 'ate, KorlDO, under fhe provisions of lattisgarh Rajya SuraKsha Adhihiyam, sel fortheparties on the question of petitioner submitted thdt the sKow the Gollector, without oppljcation of has been issued in sfale emd very. old matters. But it i5 not a case uvhe V • ' . •'......• notauttiorized to issue noti<%,| •e +hfe ^ollector bcks jurisdiction dnd tiierefore, it connot be said itiat The notice has been issued for a|>spiu'fe wdnt of jurisdiction and was totally non esf, as has'lseen h d by the Hon'bte Apex d?urt in the matter of Special Dir'ector ar|d onother V. ttohd. Shulam Shbuse and anethnr rppnrtp?1-in 5nf)f ;AI6~5CW.416thatdnvpetrtion: 'S^ ^~41fM^S^iwW^W*) ^< 3Tt^T,;iRra'(-i^^E() sn^rxi R(-<i'* TjSff <37T??T ^TT^ Vi Barve f; [^ JS ^ TOnw ^fN •B^T •^- Therefore, in view of the Apex Court, the petition is no1| cSPrf^'^'t Hl^^l' ^' I'S^ <I^ ^1< ^r atRw sni^t questioning ttie show cayse n^tice is not maintainable cincl •riTe pethioner is i^uir^to file repl^ ofi^e Aow couse noticei^ enti-t-fed to hiise those points in r^ily to show COUSB nolics before •Hie Collector. dismissed and it is accordjngiy disf^issed. tibove iaw laid down. by the Hon'bte maintainoibte, same is liabte to be Sd/- L'c:Bbadoo fge