—.z W “1%§3% “5* @W% EQ‘ § gf'w (vi $0 IN THh MP STATE ADMINISTRATIVb TRIB NAL JABALPUR BhNCH OA No/ 4 of 199; BETWEEN Jayanath Shukla S/o Late Shri 5.3m Shukla, aged about 57 years, Tahsildar, Tahsil Berla, Distt.Durg. AND 1, The State of MP through the Secretary Revenue Department Gcvt. ofJWadhya Pradesh Vallabh Bhawan,Bhopal. 2, The Commissioner Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur. 3. The Commissioner Raipur Division, Baipur. .O‘....Resp§ndents¢ The appl£oant declares that the subject-matter of the order against which he wants redressal is within the jurisdiction of the¥£ribunalc \v/<:¥hgg;3:0k{ l (i;>tu-eA TfuD“TLQ'JAn°Dl§C’¥I l. Qgteils of application A, Non—sanctioning of Efficiency Bar due on B. 2l-il-l971 despite lapse of about 2i yearso Nop~opening of sealed covers and consequent with—holding of promotions without consideration of the recommendations of the Departmental e Promotion Committees kept in the sealed cOvers with all the conseooentiel benefits” 2. ”jurisdiction of the Tribunal J} 3\r e9) \c9‘} HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH z BILASPUR W Writ Petiu'on (S) No. 701 of 2005 Petitioner Jayanath Shukla Versus RespondentS The State of Madhya Ptadesh (now Chhattisgarh) 8r. others r {Applicaiion U/ S 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985) (SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihou‘i J.) None for the petitioner. Ms Smita Ghai, Panel Lawyer for the respondents] State. 0 R D E R (oral) ( Passed on this 14th day of September, 2009) l. The matter is called for hearing twice. On both the occasions none appears nor any representation is made on behalf of the petitioner. The petitioner may not be interested in prosecuting the matter. 2. In View of the foregoing, the petition is dismissed for Want of prosecution. A copy of this order shall be sent to the petitioner forthwith. 1 Sdl— ' Satish K. Agnihotri i ’ ‘ Judge