IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATnSGARH ; BILASPUR Petitioner Respondents W.P. fS) No. 1513 of 2009 Geeta Bai Rathore, W/o Shri Hriday Lal Rafhore, aged about 39 years, R/o 'VSSage Khokhra, Tahsil - Jaajgir, Distt. Janjgu-- Champa(C.G.) Versus 1. 4. 6. 7, 10. 11. 12, 13. 14. State of CIihattisgarh, Through fhe Secretaiy, Mahila Avam. Bal Vikas Department, Mautralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raigur, Distt. Raipur(C.G.). The Additional CoUector, Janjgir, Distfc Jaajgir Champa (C.G.) Chief Executive OfScer, Jaupad Panchayat Nawagarh, Distt. Jaajgtr-Champa (C.G.) Project Officer, Mahila Bal Vikas .Department, Jaajgir, Distt.Janjgir-ChampafC.G.) Nirmala, D/o Shri Mutur @ Mahettar, agcd about 20 years, Caste- Bareth, R/o Vfflage- Khokhara, TahsU- Jaajgir, Distt. Janjgu^ Champa(C.G.) Smt Kala Bai, W/o Sliri Narottam, Caste Suiyavanshi, aged about ii&known. Smt Lata, W/o Shri Rudra Kuniar Rathore, aged about imknown. Gayatri, W/o Radheshyam Siuyavaashi.aged about uaknown. Lavekuiuari, W/o Bheexuprasad Rathore, aged about uriknowii. Nirmaia Bai, W/o Suresh Kumar Siuyavausfai, aged about unknown. Kckd Bai, W/o La?ani Narayan Ratbore. Sarita, W/o Purushottatii Rathore, aged about unlaiowii. Shobhavati, W/o Mahendra, Caste- Rathore, aged about unknown. Gauri Bai, W/o Mukesh Kumar Dubey, aged about unknown. Respondent No. 6 to 14 are resident of vfflage Khokhara, Tahsil Janjgir, Distt. Janjgir Champa (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDERART1CLE 226/227 OFTHE CONSTITUTION OPINDIA (SB; Hou'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri J.) Shri Pushpendra Patel, Advocatefor the petitioner. Shri Anm Sao, Govt. Advocate for the respondents No. 1 to 4/State. T- 1. 2. 4. 5. Thalcur O^DEJR. (Passed on this 23Id Day ofMarch, 2009) With the conseut offhe parties the m.atter is heard finally. The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondcnt No.2 to dispose of the pendiug appeal, whercas the luatter is pendiag consideration before fh.e appellate authorily/respondcnt No.2 &um 27.12.2007. Leamed counsel appearing tbr the respondents/State submits that after filing of the appeal, by way of aiaeadinent, name of respondents No. 5 to 13 were impleaded as party-respondents. Neither the petitioner has inentioned iu fhe petltton asto when the ameudment was aUowed nor has filed the latest oider-sheet, showiag present status of the appeal. However, if fhe appeal is not decided by fhis ttme, the same shaU be decided expeditiousty. In view of the above, the Additional CoBector, Janjgir Chantpa is weU advised to consider and decide fhe appeal (Atuiexure P/1), as expeditiously as possible. In view of the foregoiag, fhe petition staads disposed of. No order asto costs. ^SatishK.Aguihoiri ] Judge ;