VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. Applicant before the Commissioner workman compensation Ghadi Lal Malakar S/o Shri Govcrdhan Malakar,- Age about years, R/o Village Chhuh‘ipali, RS. Sariya, V Tahsil-Sarangarh, Distt. Raigarh (CG) Guruwari Bai W/o Latc Shri Krishna Kumar Sidar, Aged about 32 years, Occupation Household work Dinesh Kumar Sidar, S/o Late Shri Krishna Kumar Sidar, Aged about 13 years, v A» D/o Late Shri Krishna Kumar Sidar, Aged about 9 years _ Jayshlee D/o Late Shri Krishna Kumar Sidar, Aged about years No. 2 to 4 are Minors Guardian through “ their ' T—~T’“* \ \ \ 1 mew-qr w ~ S. B. HON’BLE SHRI DHIRENDRA MISI-RA, J Writ Petition 227 No.182'7 2008 PETITIONER Noie-applican‘t before the Commissioner workman compensation mother Guruwari Bai, W/o Krishna Kumar Sidar, All R/o Village Sa1heona, RS. Sariya, Tahsil ' Sarangarh, Distt. Raigarh (CG) Commissioner ‘ Workman Compensation, Raigarh (CG) 27.3.2008 counsel for the petitioner. Shri N.K. Chatteljee, By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of is impugned the order dated i) India, the petitioner h 11.10.2007 (Annexure P/( Workmen Compensation, F of respondent No. 1 to 4 f0; fees for the time being. whereby the Commissioner for laigarh has allowed the application 7 exemption nom payment of Court Grievance of the petitioner is that before granting No. 1 to 4, the petitioner was not and his objection against the grant 3y the Court below vide order dated exemption to respondents heard by the Court below of‘exemption was rejected 1 15.2.2008. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and I‘. perused the impugned orde into consideration that the r Workmen Compensation taking - The Commissioner fo respondents No. 1 to 4 are poor person, they do not have any source of livelihood and they have produced the ‘Below their application for exem] with an observation that at Whatever direction is passe shall be duly complied w 4/ applicants. is There jurisdictional error commi would occasion failure of parties warranting interfe Constitution of India Ace of substance deserves to bt s ; itself and is hereby dismiss ed. Poverty Line Card’, has allowed )tion from payment of Court fees the conclusion of the proceedings d regarding payment of Court fee, ith by the respondents No. 1 to no illegality or iniirmity or .tted by the Court below, which justice or grave injustice to the rence under Article 227 of the ordingly, the petition being devoid dismissed at the admission stage Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge [View