IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPR U Writ Appeal mew/02 @2996 ( Arising out of RevjgwPetitjon Na. 25/2006 85 W,P.(S) Nok 5245/2006 ) A4PPELLAJVT; / §us.bjl Kumar Patel j aged about 2'3 IITIONER years5 S/ o Shri Yadumani Patel; ra« —sidcn1: 0f Village: Banjipali, Post . Ofjice§ Salhtaona, Via Saliya; Tahsil Sarangarh 7 District Raigarh (CG). VERSUS RESPONDENTS : / L The State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary; Dopartment of School Education, MantraJay7 vDeK,S,BuiJdjng, Rajpur (CG. 2, .lanpad Panohayat Baramk‘ela through it$ -‘” Chie; “Aemm'm of ”o at Baramkela; D1 otnct Rajgarh (CC) . 3 Addltonal Collector, Rajgarh; D1str1ct RaJgarh (CG) 4 Dmtrlct F‘dnnntmn Of DJQtrJct RaJgarh (CC) - E IMPL 2006 P _ T) IN 12006 Y THE HON’B E S‘KAGMIHQ“ IARISINF OI. Q QW PE a ) r MW (‘ R . 5 “I OCTOBER 2006 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION !S) NO‘ 5245 /Q006 1S? (m) ‘7 w Q/y 74 I UNDER RULE J39 QOF THE HIGH COURT OF ) CHEATTISGARH RULESs 2005) 9 XI—HC-78 3a W, Wm, W Wm J4t.a...c,ce..g)>...3a>’g4[ 200g Wgéé mmm2£mm; , imwaa%vmhr %a wa&w ’a ’DEj‘»: HGN:§LE $H§1 VK SHRIVASTAVA 8: HGN'BLE 5HRE EvHIRENi‘JRA MISHRAI J3 3 012007 g 5m1‘. Maia Dubey, Advocc Te for The appeiianf. Nune appears for f'ne res‘pondenfs'. Heard on app!ica?icn (PA. No. 1392/2907) Le. an appEcatian far ameqdmenf in The memo of wri'? appeai. On 4-i0-2006 finai order has been passeé by ieamed singie Judge in WFENO’ 5245/2006. Learned singie Judge dismissed ‘rhe pe‘ri‘rien on mariJr. The pe'fi‘rioner ins‘reai of preferring wrif gppeai filed an appiica’rion for reviéw bearing \io. 25/2006 before him. Learned Singie Judge heard h‘ am? vide order dared 7-ii-2OQ6 dismissed fhe review peii'i-ion. The pefi'rioner fiied 'i'hue wrif appeai againsi The order da'ied 7-11-2006 passed by The iearhed Singie Judge in review pei’i‘iion No. 25/2006. By proposed amendnen'r! pefi‘rioner infends To deie‘re and incorporm‘e moieriais which‘wiii subsmn‘riaiiy change The na‘iure of memo of oppeai. Cnce The peTiTioner foregoes his sToTuTory righT of appeal and‘in 9 piece of preferring oppeai, he chooses To move appiicoTion for reviewfcmd when his appiicuTion for review has been reJecTed he cannoT come back To assaii The originoi order by preferring appeoi ogainsT 3T. Therefore, The amendmenT proposed by ThQeTiTiJo‘ngwhighi sobsTonjiaily changes P.T.O.