gmm 3mg ‘ m m- a“??? a}? €gHA2‘?§3{;AR§% E1LAS?U§ ¥¥£‘T‘ FE?E?%§§% T3‘ J23 4‘*i2§§}§ MuRgE Raui Sikh S’mi Safyarmigan, Aged abcut 4t") wars‘ Qwsgnti§r wwLdng as UpwSargangh ~ RV‘gG’‘ram Pamhyat Siiarikar Nagai', Vikas Khand, Koyiibaaa, Tahs=akhan§e, . Kmkm €§£mi§§sgarh Sia‘w fChha€§rh EL i rgugh-3tecrstar, ggti m;haysgia D Qf?g 3K3. Ewai'i, Ra§n CG. ‘ ha §u wk ‘ 2. €a£§¢wigKank€g W§§? ?E?%?¥~GN {INEEER €6§STiTifTi§N (TE i’N‘fJ‘IA FijR ESE’ANLL (Ti? APPRQI’RIATE WRIT IN THE NATEBE 9F V%ANEAW¥J%S €$R$§QRAE§ ETC § ” w i§Pm Dim 63£a Ss Thy Sui Kwikw, Ciiihaiiisgay’a 3’ " Su‘haEEV3L3EG§1a§ S€iEs€r<E ‘3 F&khanjor€, Bistt. Kanker, X 4, Chhamsgarh‘ Eiwi Ezaimgia Sfe- Bhirandra Bairagi, Agaé’ 3mm 25 yéarg RXGm 327. £4 Faidmnbra §i§é%. Kankar. Chhatiisgarh. ,/ v. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 1254 of 2005 > Mukul Paul Petitioner Versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh & Others WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (SB : Hon’ble Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J.) Present :— Shri Pankaj Shrivastava, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri N.N. Roy, Panei Lawyer for the State/respondent No.1 to 3. Shri B.D. Guru, Advocate for the respondent No.4. g ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on 19‘“ Day of Juiy, 201 O) 1. By this petition, the petitioner impugns the show cause notice dated 21/02/2005 (Annexure P/1) whereby, the petitioner has been directed to present in the Court of Sub-Divisionai Officer (Revenue), Pankhajur, with regard to alleged misconduct against him. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this allegation has . been raised earlier by some persons which has been. considered by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) by order dated 27/10/2004. All the allegations leveled against the petitioner in thecomplaint have been found wrong and was accordingly dismissed. 3. Be that as it may, in the instant case, challenge is to the legality of show cause notice dated 21/02/2005, however, no final order has been passed. lt is informed that the proceedings pursuant to the show cause notice is still pending consideration. .Thus, the petitioner may submit his reply to the said notice raising the groUnds which are available to him. The Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) thereafter, considering all aspects of the matter, may pass appropriate order. In view of foregoing, it is not necessary to interfere with the show cause notice at this stage, when no adverse order has been passed against the petitioner. Thus, the petition is dismissed granting liberty to the petitioner to raise all the earlier facts before the appropriate authority. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/_ ;Satish K. Agnihotrii Judge Arun