y^ %sS '^.9 •<-ss"' ^ ^ >Sy'iSt- ..^ i 'l VS'rg^ li-. fc, ;:i;'t. •ti, HI6H COURT OF CHHATTESS^H AT BILASPUR MVISION BENCH CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JA6&ISH BHALLA, Actirg Chief Justice & HON'BLE SHRI T.P. SHARMA, Judge W"tPetitionN^1340of_2005 Petitioner Essal Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Throu9h Anand Agarawal, Director/Promoter, , R/o Ameri Road, Nehru Nagor, Bilaspur' ,(C.S.) Versus Resppndent South Eaetern Coalfields Limited, Bilaspur, throu9h Seneral Manige (Civil), Seepat Road, Bilospur (C.6.) Writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India Present : None for the petitioner. &r. N.K. Shukla, Senior Advocate with Shri Dilip DtAey, A P.S. Koshy,cowisel for the respondent. ORAL OR&Bi (14th Janu,yy, 2008} The followirg judgment of the Court mos delivered by Honble Jagdish Bhalla.Ag C.J. This writ petition is directed against the order Arted 28-01-2005 wherein the request of the petitioner for the experience of its two directors be token into account while considerin9 their matter and in the process, has prayed that the status of the said infrdstructures Private Limitsd be regulorized in the light of the experience of its directors. 2.- As referred herein above, the matter was considered by the authorities vide order dated 28-Ol-2CX)5 and the same was rejected on the ground thct there are two different juristic personolities (a) Partnership Firm (b) Private Limited Firm. .^E%s :fSS?SS, j .JA ^a-* '&S3£^V" -•2. 3. We are of the considered opinion that the partnership firra and the private limited firm enjoy independent juristic status and by no stretch of ima9ination, private limited firm can inherit the status of tiie partnership firm. 4. In view of the above, no interference is warranted. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- AcfingChiefJustice ' iVR Sd/- T.P Sharma Judge