c 63-1<^ .i^h ? _. _ t s^.?'^.^s^i ^ s Hi^ iCJ 6 IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.(S) N0. ff^f> /2010 (S.B.) PETITIONER RESPONDENTS ^. A^% _^/w ^/j^/ '7/M/ ^.'- ^ ~s^/^^ \ y^- /- -' -- :"^\ !l W 'S9{U f?.\ ^•\ 'sf ff '-.. /. "w' s • ,-"v- —„^^ ' /^ ^tt~?Brf8'^' •;.8Sfyp- ^?' Sajid Khan, S/o Shri Samad Khan, aged about 39 years, R/o Subhsh Nagar, Durg, Distt. Durg (C.G.) VERSUS 1 State of Chhattisgarh Through :- The Secretary, Panchayat Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. High Power Caste Scintiny Committee, Adim Jati Anusandhan Prashikshan Sansthan, Ravishankar University Campus, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Durg Distt. Durg (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. t .'^1 /£w ''v^Ss. ^ COURT OF CHHATTiSGWSH AT B1LASPUI )f. Sai.id 1< Versus WRiT PETiTION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTiTUTION OF INDiA Present:- Shri Somkant Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri V.V.S. Moorthy, Deputy Advocate Genera! with Shri P.K. Bhaduri, Pane! Lawyer for the State. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on 4Bi Day of May,2010) i. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits thatthe High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee (for short 'the Committee') has not accepted the appiication submitted by the petitioner for verification of his social status, though it is not ciear from the applications dated 08.10.2009 (Annexurs P/6) and 08.01.2010 (Annexure P/7) that the same were piaced before the Committee, as it does not contain any 3 Arun Shri Moorthv. learned Deoutv Advocate Generai aDDearing with Shri Bhaduri. submits that the Committee has decided to entertain a!l the appiications and consider the case in accordance with the procedure laid down by the Supreme Court in Kumari Madhuri PaSI & another v. AM. Commissioner, Tribal Dev^opmwit & Ofheis and instructions and directions issued by the State Government from time to tiane. Learned counse! further submits that if the petitioner submits an application for verification of his sociai status before the committee, the same shal! be acceoted. and decided, in accordance with law and on its own merits, within a reasonable time. !n view of foregoing, according to leamed counsel for the petitioner, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. ___________——-- Sd/- SatishK.Agnihom Judge 1 (1994; 6 SCC 241