(^ ^ cr INTHE HIGH^COURJT OP CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition N0. I f o I /2005 PETITIONER ^'^ <<iy^ ^y^ \>^5/° <^^€' .-^ RBSPONDENTS ^&t.^—pl^^-^ fYJ/^7.'^^ ^.^^B!L<S"US A.C.Burinan, Aged about 44 years S/6 Shri P.D. Burman > Assistant Corumissioner •Trible Development Departraent Durg (C.G.). VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Trible Welfare Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Collector District Durg (C.G.) 3. D.R. Bhagat, S/o. Keshav Bhagat Aged about 46 years Assistant Comruissioner Trible Development Department Durg, Distt. Durg (C.G.) WRIT PETITION U/A 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^^ 's^-tiwwii, vs^\ww, fa?Tray .^..P-JJ.OJ. Sli^l iw (q^T sn^T^iTf^ri^ (rarai^i sbqi+' TOnwflfia'sn^T 'hlilFcKfl-i t(|t<cffffte'<rl tRl^iK %3Tl^[T3TI^r ^f tlkff 2^3.2005 ShriB.L. Denibra, counsel Shri Sandcep Dubey, Heard bn admlssion. The petition has been flled) (Annexure P- 6) by which flle rei order of stetus quo granted ia,^. retained thc petitfoncr as weU a^ order may be givea fuB cSect to. Learned coiuisel for respondent No.3 should not ha^ also subinits fhat the work te incorrect. On being asked to leam^d how ttiis dlstribution is iacorrwjt, grounds axul also to apprise of such distribution cauuot be made. It seems that fte preserviag the status quo as it| order dated 28.9.2004 inay be I don't fiad any reasop to The petitfoa . L stands |for the petititoner. Govejnunent Advocate for fhe State. I ^jamst the onler dated 7.12.2004 ssjpoiideat No.2, ia eonipliaace ofthe r.P. No. 3226/2004 on 28.9.2W4, rcspoadent No.3 so that, the said pctitiouer submlts that fhe e been rctamed at this place. He accordmg to Anaexure P- 6 distifibution counsel for ttie petitioncr as to he is not ia a posidon ta teB ttie |the reasons, on the basis of wbich impu|gned order has bcen passed for I existed on 28.9.2004 so fhat, the c^spccted. ^aterfere ia fhis petition. dist^iissed at thc Erinussion stage itaetf. Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge su.nltsi —-^-in^