sa; £i. ^ HISH CQURT OF CWATnSGAW AT BIUSPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 4642 of 2006 1. Amrit Lal Parkar. Aaed about 32 vears, 5/0 Shri A-'salik Raa", Par-kar, Instructor (MechfflTcal) 2. Lalit Ram Baghei', Aged about 35 years, S/o Shri Raghunafh Bcghs!, Vi/orkshop Instructor (Eiectrica!) 3. Radheshyam Kunjam, Aged about 37 Years, 5/o Late Shri Bheek.ha Rans Kunjam, Instructor (fttechanical) 4. Ganesh Ram Sori, Aged about 35 years, S/o Shri P.R. 5ori, Instructor (Workshop) , Amaa" S'mgh Thakur, Aged about 38 years, S/o Shri Loxman .Thakur, Workshop Instructor 6. Sonuram Kawde, Aged about 38 years, 5/o Shri Nakcheda Ram Kawde, Workshop Instructor 7. Khathkudi Ram A<>aur/a, Aged about 42 yeo.rs, S/o Shri Miri Ram AAcurya, Instructor. 9. Jagmohan Singh Marko, Aged about 37 years, S/o Shri Pusau Singh Marko, Workshop Instructor. Laxman Singh, Aged about 34 Years, S/o Late 5hri Parau, Instr-uctor. 10. 6.R. Kaushik, Aged about 46 years, S/o Late Shri Dahru Ram Kaushik, Workshop Instructor". 11. Khemnath Rathore, Aged about 43 years, S/o Shri Lachhi Ram Rathore, fi Versus ENTS 1. 2. 3. Technical Assistant (Ex-Workshop Instructor). All are working in :- ©overnmant Engineering College, Jagdalpur bistt. Bastar (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Higher and Technical Education and Man Power Planning Department, Mantralaya at &.K.5. Bhawan, Raipur, Distt. ftaipur (C.&) The Director, Directorate of Technical Educatioh Chhnttisgarh, Raipur (C.S.) The Principal, Sovernment Engineering Coltege, Jagdaipur, Distt. Bastar (C.6.) s WRIT PETETEON UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTEON OF INDIA Singie Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K.Agnihotri. Present: Shri Rakesh Anthony,counsel for the petitioners. Ms. Smita Ghai, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORDER fORA'i.) (Passed on 22nd bayof June, 2009) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners ho.ve made representation dated 22-05-2006 (Annexure P-7) and the same is still pending consideration, as no order has been passed on the said representation. However, learned counsel for the petitioners, on instructions, submits that the petitioners do not wmt to contest this petition on merit at this stage. Learned counsel prays that the petitioners may.be permitted to make ·fre.sh representations to the authorities cpncerned and the authorities concerned may be directed to :~^ Kvr consider ond decide the same as expeditiously as possible in accordance with iaw, within a stipulated period. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the State respondents submits that in the eve.ni, the petitioners file afresh representations before the autliorities concerned, the same shall be considered and decided, in accordance with !aw, on its own merits, at any rate within an outer limit of six weeks from the date of receipt of the representations. 3. In view of foregoing , according to learned counsel qspearing for the petitioners, no1+iing survives in the matter, for adjudication. 4. Consequently, the wrlt petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Satisb^.A8nibow judge