\A^° HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARHAT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 5846 of2008 Petitioners : 1. Durgesh Singh aged about 29 years, S/'o Ram Prasad Singh, Caste Kshatriya, C.N. 220, 10th Battalion Silfilly, Ambikapur, Surguja Distt. Surguja(CG). 2. Akshay Singh aged aboirt 23 years, S/o Ajay Singh, caste Kshatriya, C.N. 87, 10 Battalion SiUilly, Ambikapur, Surguja, Distt. Surguja (CG) Presently Both are Posted at Bilaspur (CG). Respondents VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh tlirough Secretary, Departmest of Home, Dau -Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipyr (CG). 2. Director General of Police Mantralaya, Raipur (CG). 3, Inspector General of Police, CAF, Blulai, Chhattisgarh Security Force, Bhilai (CG). 4. Deputy Inspector General of Police, GAF, Bilaspur (CG). 5. Commandant, 10 Battalion Chhattisgarh Security- Force, Silfilly, Ambikapur, Surguja (CG). 6. Enquiry Of&cer, 10 Battalion Chhattisgarh ^Security Force, Silfilly,- Ambikapur, Surguja (CG). (WRIT PETITION UNDER ARI1CLE 226 OF THE, CONSTITmiON OF INDIA) CSB: Hon'Ue Mr. Satish K. Aenihotri, J.) Present : Shri D.N. Prajapati, Advocate for the petitioners. Smt. Snrit Ghai, Panel Lawyer for the State. QRALOKDER (Passed OB 20UX day ofMarch, 2009) 1. With the consent ofthe parties,Ae matter is taKen up for heariag fmaUy. E!:;= f>: ili ^ill lii ^r ISahu 2. Tlie petitioners, by this petition impugn tlie order dated 16.04.2008 (Annexure P/'l), passed bythe Commandant, 10 Battalion, CUhattisgarh Special Armed Forces, Surguja (CG), whereby the petitioners have been removed fi-om service. 3. In the same time, first petitioner has filed a representation before the DepuU' Inspector General of Police, Chhattisgarii Special Armed Forces, Bilaspur, against tlie said order dated 16.04.2008, which was treated as statutory appeal. It appears on the basis of retum that the appellate authority has sunmioned tfae requisite documents, to consider the appeal filed bythe first petitionei- which is pending consideration. 4. In view ofpendency of statirtory appeal before the. apgellate autliority, no writ is maintainable. Thus, this petition is premature and is accordingly dismissed in respect ofthe &st petitioner. 5. No documents have been produced to mdicate that the second petitioner has also filed a statutoo' appeal/representation before fhe Deputy Inspector General of Police, Chhattisgarh Special Ai'med Forces, Bilaspur. The altemative remedy of statutoiy appeal is effective and expeditious. Thus, liberty is reserved to the second petitioner to take recourse to statutory appeal underfhe provisions oflaw, ifso advised. 6. Thus, the petition field by the second petitioner is also dismissed with the above stated libert}f. No order asto costs. 7. Consequently, peiiding applications, ifany, stand disposed of. •SdA,.... SatishK.,Agnihotri ^Iudge '