.yvK,. .'fg^: Jl "^^^^.^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR ^ W.P.(C) No. 6064 of 2010 PETITIONER Kunwarsai Manjhwar, S/o Shri Jhaguram Manjhwar, Age about 50 years, R/o Village - Chinchouli (Thitholi), Tahsil- Kartala, Distt: Korba (C.G.), Through its Power of Attorney holder Matadin Jaiswal, Age 55 years, S/o. Shri Dhaniram Jaiswal, R/o Village- Pharsavani, Tahsil- Kartala, District - Korba (C.G.) Versus RESPONDENTS 1 Hon'ble Tribunal, Ministry of mines, Government of India, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Mines, New Delhi 2 State of Chhattisgarh, Through its Secretary, Mineral Resources Department, Government of Chhattisgarh, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) 3 Jan Kumar Sonhari, Age about 34 years, S/o Ramsingh Sonjhari, R/o Village - Kudri, Tahsil - Janjgir, District - Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Appearance : Mr. Yogesh Pandey, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Kasheef Sakeel, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. Shashank Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent No.2. Mr.Vaibhav Shukla, Advocate for respondent No.3. ORAL ORDER (08.03.2011) SUNIL KUMAR SINHA. J. Heard. Petitioner- Kunwarsai Manjhwar has filed this petition for issuance of direction to respondent No.1 to decide the revision petition filed by the fz W.P.rci No. 6064 of 2010 "7 petitioner before the said authority against the order passed by the Government of Chhattisgarh. Mr. Kasheef Sakeel, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.1, made statement that respondent No.1 has already heard the matter on admission and interim relief. He submits that by memo/notice dated 6.12.2010, the revision was fixed for hearing before respondent No.1 on 21.12.2010. It was accordingly heard and necessary orders on interim application was passed on 7.2.2011 directing for fixing the matter for final hearing and rejecting the application for grant of stay. He submits that the above steps were taken in file No. 12/(04)/2010 - RC-11. He further submits that the documents to the above effect have been filed today along with I.A. No. 1/2011, an application for taking documents on record. Since the revisional authority has atready taken cognizance in the matter and preliminary hearing has already taken place and the stay application has been disposed of and further that the matter has been directed to be listed for final hearing, 1 do not deem it appropriate to issue any direction in favour of the petitioner at this stage. The writ petition, claiming above relief(s), therefore, is disposed of at this stage. However, it is observed that the learned Tribunal would try to dispose of the matter at the earliest in accordance with law. The petition stands finally disposed of. Sd/- SunaK-UInar Judge Sinha 1; 1