INTiLIfEIHGHCOURTOFJUDICATUREATBHJASPUR C. ‘ W. P. (S) No.9"?f 572009 Sinlgle Bene ' } z remshankar Shrivas S/o Shri Ram Praad Shrivas, Age abput '47 years, R/o Bahadur guda, Raj endra Nagar, Jagalpur (CG) PETITIbNER VESS I RU / 1. State ofChhattisarh Trough— Secretar cheduled Caste, Schedul ibe S ed Tr and Baward Class Welfare Deartment D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur 0G,) The Commissioner, Tribal Development » Raipur (CG) ' The Secretar Mata Rukamani Sewa Sansthan Samiti, D'imrapal, Tah. & District-Jagdalpur‘(C.G) RESPODENTS ‘ETI‘IONUNDERARI‘ICLSZ26 OFTHE CONSTITUTIO F INDI 1 I) A “A: ‘ " ‘ G h g s V f d g h y, k p, ( N y, WRIIPI’E N - O A HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGRl-l AT BILASPUR SB HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRITINKER DIWAKER W.P.!si NO. 4715 ’2009 PETITIONER : Premshankar Shriv‘as Versus L , RESPONDENTS ‘ State o‘lc.G. & Others WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF § INDIA Aggearance. Shm S P Kale counsel for the petAtlone Shn P Das G A for the State 01mm (26 os 2009) Wlth the consent of the counsel for the partles the matter ls heard fmally Contentmn of the counsel for the petltloner 1s that number i‘ of 1dent1oa1 petltlons have been deCIded by thls Court and one ‘~ such case 1s W P No 4108/2005 (Smt A Lall Vs State of C G & Others) He submlts that hls case 1s squarely covered W1th the abovementloned ease and therefore at thls stage he may be ,perrmtted to Wlthdraw thls petltxon Wlth hberty to f1le . representahon before respondent N01 He however submlts that I d1reot1on may be 1ssued for dec1d1ng hls representation I, _ _‘ expedltlously L ' Counsel for the State subrmts that at th1s stage he cannot make any statement as to whether the case of the petmoner ls 1 3 covered w1th the order passed m aforementloned wrlt petltlon as relied upon. by the petitioner. He further submits that lf the 'petitioner'will make a representation the same would be decided 1n accordance w1th law after scrutimzmg the factual and legal pos1t10n of the case , Accordingly, the pet1t1on 1s d1sm1ssed as Withdrawn W1th the liberty as aforesald In the eventuality of fllmg any such representatlon by the petitloner w1th1n a penod of three weeks from the date of recelpt of copy of this order, 1t 1s expected that v the‘same would be decidedwithin a further period oftwo months. 7 ‘It is emade clear that this Court has not expressed any pinion on merits’of the case andrthe respondent No.3 would be at liberty‘to decide the representationstrictly in accordance with l , . sw- l Prltmker rwak Judge i o 1:, lawl ie < ari- r ' Jr k r t ‘5“? , er