H1GH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR PETITIONER RESPONDENTS W.P.(C) No. 448 of 2010 Anoop Tripathi, S/o Prabal Pratap Tripathi, aged about 26 years, R/o Shivdhari, Colony Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) Versus 1 Indira Gandhi Agriculture University, Krishak Nagar, Raipur: Through its Registrar Raipur (C.G.) 2 Margdarshan Sansthan, Agriculture College Through its Principal, Ambikapur, District Surguja(C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THECONSTITUTION OF INDIA Appearance: Mrs. Hamida Siddiqui, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ramakant Mishra, Advocate for respondent No.1. ORAL ORDER (15.04.2011) SUNIL KUMAR SINHA. J. Heard. Petitioner- Anoop Tripathi has filed this petition for the following relief(s):- "(10) RELIEF(S) SOUGHT:- 10.1 Writ in the nature of mandamus may be issued directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to appear in clearance examination for two semesters. 10.2 Particularly respondent No.1 may be directed to decide the representation dated 17.2.2009 in the light of academic regulation. 10.3 Any appropriate writ, directionor order may also kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the cause. 10.4 That an affidavit in support of this petition." Mrs. Hamida Siddiqui, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that presently she is not pressing anyother relief(s) except relief No. 10.2 Bl, -;»y":a.sfe.\ "'^s^; ^"-^Ste^^ ''•"81SS&, ^1: '"Ss.^ ^sSst W.P.rONo. 448 of2010 in which the petitioner has prayed for direction to decide the representation dated 17.2.2009 in light ofacademic regulation. Mr. Ramakant Mishra, learned counsel for respondent No.1, submits that the University will dispose of the representation dated 17.2.2009, filed by the petitioner, in accordance with law. However, he submits that the petitioner may be directed to file a fresh copy of the representation before the University so that if the earlier representation is not traced, the decision may be taken on this fresh copy of the representation. In view of the above submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction that if so advised, the petitioner may file a fresh copy of representation dated 17.2.2009, along with forwarding letter of the Principal, before the University within 7 days from today, and if the copy of the representation is filed, the University shall take a decision on the said representation within a period of 4 weeks from the date of its receipt by the University. The University will pass a reasoned order on the representation dated 17.2.2009, the copy ofwhich will be filed by the petitioner as above. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. There shall be no orders as to cost. §()/_ Sunil Kumar Siiihai Judge fr