Single Ram r .\ a c7 g ‘ \©G(/ @@ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR [C.G.1 WRIT PETITION (S) No. é C/ i 7} /201 1 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE %§ '7 V * CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE \ WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTIONS ~~'" PETITIONER /" Shiv Kumar Mishra S/o Late Mohan Lal Mishra, Aged—about 61 years, Retired Spot Assistant (Sthal sahayak) R/o Dusekela, Post— Dusekela, Tahsil— Kharasiya, Distt.- Raigarh [C.G.] VERSUS RESPONDENTS ,/1. State of Chhattisgarh Through— Secretary, Water resources . H103 - department, D.K.S.Bhawa_n, Raipur W“ . [C.G.] , 2. Chief Engineer, Minimata (Hasdeo) Bango Pariyozana, Bilaspur [C.G.] /3. Executive Engineer, Minimata (Hasdeo) Bango canal division—5, Kharasiya, Distt.— Raigarh [C.G.] HIGH COURT OF CHEATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SB : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITINKER D1W&KER w.P.gsp.No. 64871201 1 PETITIONER Shiv Kumar Mishra VEIEHS RESPONDEN‘TS Staté of CG. 6n Others Shn' Suresh Kumar Verma, counsel for tho patitioner‘ Shn' Praveen Das, Dy.G,A. for the State. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ORDER go4.11.2o11) Gn‘evance of the petitioner in the present petition is that though he is entitled for Exation of pension and retiral dues but the same has not been given to him for the best reasons known to the respondents. Counsel for the yetitioner submits that his case is squarely covered with the decision of this Court passed in W.P. No. 4135] 2004 (M.A.Hakim Vs. state of MP. (Now C.G. & Others). He mrther submits that in similar case, W.P.(S) No. 4166f08 {Derharam Vs. State of C.G. 81, Another), this Hon’ble Court has disposed of the peu’tion with a direction for consideration of the case of the said petitioner. He further submits that the representation of the petitioner (Annexure Pf4) is pending since 17.10.2011 and purpose of hling this petition would be served if direction is issued for deciding the said representation. State counsel submits that the petitioner has made the representation recently on 17.10.2011 and without waiting for‘ suhicient period he has rushed to the Court even not giving any breathing time to the'authorities to consider his representation. He howeverizhas’ no objection if direction is issued to the resp. No.2 to decide the pending representation of the petitioner. Accordingly, the present petifion is disposai of with a direction to the petitioner to make a fresh representation along with copy of this order to the respS. 2 8r. 3 and in tum the said authorities will decide the representation of the petitioner in an objective manner as expeditiously as possible considering the decisions of this Court passed in M.A.Hakim (supra) 8r, Derharam (supra). It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and the authority concerned would be at liberty to decide the same strictly in accordance with law. t r Sd/— i Pritinker Diwaker Judge