HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C1 N0. 847 OF 2009 "-~)'e. PETITIONER: Archana Dey (Arehana Gupta), wife of Shri Utpal Gupta, aged about 40 years, Occupation Private Service, Resident of village Dipka, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (CG), through the Power of Attomey namely, Prashant Dey, son of late Kali Krishna Dey, aged about 49 years, resident ofvillage Dipka, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (CG). RESPONDENTS Versus 1. South Eastem Coalfields Limited, through the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Seepat Road, Bilaspur (CG). 2. The Chief General Manager, SECL, Gevra Project, Korba (CG). 3. The General Manager, SECL, Gevra Project, Korba (CG). 4. The Collector, Korba (CG). 5. The Sub Division'al Officer, Katghora, District Korba (CG). 6. The Tahsildar, Katghora, District Korba (CG). 7. Estate Officer, Gewara Project, Korba (West), Distt. Korba (CG). 8. The Naib Tahsildar, Dipka, Tahsil Katghora, District Rorba (CG). 9. Dilip Singh Kenwat, aged about 55 years, Halka Patwari, Presently posted at village Chotiya, post Madai, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (CG). 10. Dasahari Prasad Tiwari, aged about 72 years, resident of village Dhatura, Post Korbi, via Hardibazar, Dist. Korba 11. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Department of Revenue, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (CG). S u ^8»«i& •s .. '¥ ." f,, ':Si.^;'^/ :;J'' '•:-!sy~:- •-?1 Secretary, Department of Revenue, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (CG). (Writ petition under Article 226 ofthe Constitution oflndia) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Mr. Ashok Kumar Shukla, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Vivek Sharma, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORDER fORAL) (Passed on this 24th day ofJuly, 2009) Heard leamed counsel for the parties. 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the legality and validity ofthe order dated 25 January, 1995 (Armexure - P/4) passed by the District Judge, Bilaspur, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner herein (appellant No.3 therein) and others (AJay Kumar & Others vs. Security Inspector, South East Coalfields Limited) has been dismissed. 2. From perusal ofrecords, it appears that against the order dated 17 October, 1989 passed by the Estate Officer, Gevra Project, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the District Judge, Bilaspur which was dismissed on 25 January, 1995 (Annexure-P/4). Thereagainst, the petitioner preferred W.P. No.321 of 1996, which was dismissed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh by a detailed and reasoned order on the 11 October, 1996 (Annexure - P/5). Letters Patent Appeal, being L.P.A. No.45 of 1997, was filed against fhe order dated 11 October, 1996 passed by the leamed Single Judge. The leamed Division Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh dismissed the Letters Patent Appeal by order dated 3 March, 1997 (Annexure P/5-A). Thus, the dispute was taken to the High court in v^,], y^ -^" ^n^^' the first round and the petitioner lost at every stage i.e. before the District Court, in Writ Petition before the leanaed Single Judge and thereafter, before the Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal. The petitioner again seeks to challenge the legality and correctness of the order dated 25 January, 1995, (Annexure P/4) passed by the District Judge, Bilaspur, when the issue raised herein has already been considered and decided by the High Court ofMadhya Pradesh and has attained finality, agitating the same issue before this Court again aad again amounts to misuse and abuse ofjudicial process. Thus, fhe writ petition deserves to be and is accordingly dismissed with cost quantified to be a SUITI of Rs.5000/- payable to the High Court Legal Aid Committee. —- — ——— Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge i Amit