t^ ? >-^ IN THE HIGH GOBRT OF JODICATUPvE'AT BIL&SPUR (C.S. j Writ Petttlon No. ?5"7 of 2004 PETXTIOHERS ...-^^- ^^y' <^^"" '^ RESPONDENTS ! 1. Gayatri Kishor—Saha, S/o Govind | t Ram Sahu, aged 32 years, Chowkidar,! I.T.I.,Korba, Distt. Korba (C.Q.). | 2. Shyamlal Yadav S/o Tihara Ram Yadav aged 35 years, Ghowkidar, I.T.I., Koi-ba, Distt. Korba (C.G.). 3. .Dilip Kumar Yadav S/o Kartik Ram Yadav, aged 34 years, Jalwahak, I.T.I..Korba, Distt. Korba (C.G.) 4. sakal Ram Sidar S/o iJagbandfa Ram Yadav, agsd 36 years* Haali., I.a'.I:.|sj Korba,. Distt. Korba (G.S.). 5. HanKi Ram Sahu S/o Heera Ram Saha, aged 34 years, Chowkidar, I•T.I. Korba, Distt. Korba (C.G.). 6. Bharatlal Yadav S/o Birbal Prasad Yadav, aged 31 years, Cook(Rasoea), I.T.I.,Korba,,Distt. Kgrba (C.G.). 7. Sant Ram Yaday S/o Fadal Rara Yadav, aged 35 years, Cook, I.T.I. Korba, Elisti;. &orba (e.G. ) . V e r s a s : 1. State of Clihattj.sgarh , 4% Through ; Seeretary., SaaiiiK^SatJ., ! ;'.i:."::;;.:' •: n l:; 11' Anasacfait Janjati, Paelaha(3a^'%arig:' Eavam Alp Saritefayak i^alyan. SeparSaeirj ,-::' .p.K.S. Bfaawan,' Ra3.E(ar:l,(C.»@»^: . .. • • C6;inti3»»:.• *:;' U^^Ws^.^ti.w, fsv iijLti^ss.i,iaS>-*V&SESS3!S.SJ.iSSSisO'BUiBCssair ^•»Aar ^^.i^fiWi,l,.l 2 — 2» Assistant Commissicfh'sr^ T'3'?-<,••<-.... Aadivasi Vikas, Korba, Distt.KorBa. 3. Prlncipal, Industrial Training I.n.sti'tu^j.on .,. (I.T.I.), Korba, Distt. Korba(C.G.). 4.. Collector, . Aadivasi Vikas, Korba, Distt. Korba (C.G.). ; »^T PETITIGN UNDER ARTICLfi 22$/22,2<OF THE CGNSTITUTION [| OF INDIA FOR ISSU&NCE OF aPPROPRI&TE BaR.IT/DIRECTIpNS/ ORDER ; \\s i^: 1 \^ 1K .[fc-: i rlll Sl' ili HIGH COURT OF GHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR WritPtetitionNo. 157 of 2004 Petitioners Gayatri Kishor Saihu & ofhcrs Versus Respoadents StateofChIiattisgarh&others Sia^le Beacli: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K.AgnUiotrt. None for the petitioncr. Smt. Anju Ahuja, Deputy Govemiaent Advocate for the respondents/Stete. ORALORDER (24A April, 2006) The foBowingorderoftheCoUrtwas passed by SaUsIlK. Agnthotri, J. 1. The matter is catled forhcarmg twice. On both the occasioas, none appears nor any represeutation is inade pn behalfofthe petitKiners. 2. Ia view of fhe above, the petition stands dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/'- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge