® HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR M. C. C. No. 124 of 2009 Petitioners 1. Ku. Geeta Dewangan, D/o Ramlal DCTyaogaii, aged about 27 years, R/o Suslula Mali, Sustdla Niwas, ia front of Rajamath, Praveen Ward, Pauara Para, Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar (C.G.) 2. Deepak Kuuiar Sinlia, S/o Jeevan. Lal Siaha, aged about 32 years, R/o 45/70, PoUce Chowki Road, Clihatrapati Palace, Maitri Kunj, RisaU, BhUai, Distt. Durg (C.G.) Versus Respondents 1. 2. 3. 4. a. State of Chhattisgarh, ttu-ough the Secretaiy, Hjgher & Tecluucal Education Department, Maiitralaya, D.K.S. Bbawan, Raipur(C.G.) The Secretary, Maa Power & PIanning (Janshalsti Evam Niyojan Vibhag), Maatralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur(C.G.) Director, Einployiaent Tramuig, Matula Polyteclmic Campus, Bairon Bajar, Raipur (C.G.) Joint Director (Tramin^ Industrial Tramiag Institute, New Shanti Nagar, Gali No.4, Raipiir(C.G.) The Pruicipal, Industrial Training Institute, J^dalpur, Distt. Bastar (C.G.) (AppUcation for restoration ofW.P.No. 3473/2005) (SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agiuhotri J.) SIiri Maaoj Misbra, Advocate for fhe petitioners. Shri Ajit Siagh, Pauel Lawyer for the respondents. y'f ^; ^;.. 1. O R D E R (orall ( Passed on this 7dl day ofAugust, 2009 ) Heard. The petitioners have filed this applicatiou fer restoration offhe Writ Petition NQ. 3473/2005 (Ku. Geeta Dewaagan & auofbier *. . - . • Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others), which was disniissed oa •^ 1.6th March, 2009 for waat of prosecution. In fhis laatter (M.C.C.No. 124/ 2009), fhe order fqr issue ofnotice was passed oii 15.4.2009. As the petitioners did aot pay the required <a. Thdnir —ri^ process fee, the niatter was listed before the Additional Registrar (Judicial) on 22.6.2009, poiutii^ out default. On that day Shri Manoj Misbra, learued coimsel sought for aud was granted one week's tim.e to reinove fhe default by paying P.F. with an application for condonation of delay iu payment of P. F. Even then, siace leamed counsel has faUed to remove the defaiilt, fhe luatter is Usted today i.e. 7.8.2009, pointuig out default. Learued counsel appeariog for the petitioner submits that fhe petitioners bave paid fhe P.F. on 7.7.2009 but the application for condonation of delay ia paying P. F. could not be filed, In view of the above, it appears fhat the petitioxicrs are aot iaterested in prosecuting fhe matter. The application is dismissed for default. -^ Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge '••«£- ^ . s^-- - •X '-•-A' Ma