”WW mm Ck‘W’ @ U HIGHVCOURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WRIT PETITION 1C) N02\q?%OF 2011 PETITIONER / Galib Memorial Education Society, Sector-VI, Bhilai, Durg, Chhattisgarh, through its President Mohammad Tahir Khan S/o- Late Smile Khan, Resident of— HIG—SS, Hudku Sector B, Durg, Chhattisgarh. VERSUS PONDENTS /1. State Authority of India Limited, Bhilai Stee1 Plant, through Managing Director, Espat Bhawan, Bhilai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. Acting D.G.M. (Estate) Bhilai Steel Plant, State Office Civic Centre, Bhilai, District— Durg, Chhattisgarh. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226(227 OF THE ONSTITUTION OF INDIA. The humble petition of the petitioner named above most respectfully submits as under:— w 1. PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONERS. As mentioned in the cause title. RES W m . w?£§JWZ\38(g gm, mm m 41% WW WW mmm mfmm SB : Hon’ble Shri Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, J. 25-04-2011 Shri'T. K. Tiwari, counsel for the patitioner. Heard on admission. This petition has been med by the petitioner aggrieved vide notice dated 26-02-2011 (Annexure P-1) issued by the respondent No.2 directing the petitioner to deposit the alieged outstanding dues to the tune of Rs.2,60,736/—. Learned counsei for the petitione‘ submits that such a demand is illegal and arbitrary, because the petitio er has no knowledge about the outstanding amount, which has been stated in the notice. Further submission of learned counsel for the pe itioner that though, the petitioner had submitted a representation on 31-03 2011 to the respondent No.2, yet no decision has been taken on the same. The present matter relates to a dis ute with regard to amount of rent and other charges payable by the petiti ner in his capacity as tenant of respondents. At this stage, this Court is 0t inclined to go into the dispute with regard to amount of rent and other c arges payable by the petitioner to the respondents. However, it is found th t the petitioner has submitted a representation on 31~O3—2011 (Annexu / P-2) to the respondent No.2. Therefore, the respondent No.2 should ecide the same one way or the other. lf any decision is taken against th petitioner, it would be open for the petitioner to take recourse to such dy as may be available under the law. With the aforesaid observation, the petition is nnally disposed off. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge I“- [n'tééfe‘ii r r e