il 'to^ tr.-10fb t.^)p^ ST^Sl( HIGH COURT OF GHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH Coram HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. PETITIONER RESPONDENTS W.P. (Ct (PR) No.4967 of 2008 Jayant Thethwar, S/o. Late Shri Hariram Thethwar, Aged about 42 years, R/o. Thethwarpara, Ganja Chowk Raigarh, District- Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Secretary, Department of Urban Administration & Development, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Municipal Corporation, Raigarh, Through the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Raigarh, District- Raigarh, (Chhattlsgarh) 3. The President, Munfelpal Corpor^ion, Raigarh, District- Raigarh, (Chhattisgarh) 4. The Executive Director, Jindal Power & Steel Ltd., Pathalgaon, Distrtot-Raigarh, (Chhattisgarh) KVRrr pETmoN UNDERARTICLE 220 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Present: Shri Pankaj Shrivastava, counsel for the petitioner. ShEi Sumesh Bajaj, Govemment Advocate for the State / respondentNo.1. OR D E R itd (23t°September,2008) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J.: Leamedcounsel for the partles are heard on admission. -3" \e^ 2) Petitioner Jayant Thethwar has flled this writ p^ition for the following reliefs: "10.1 Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire records frqm Respondents No.2 and 3, relating to the case of the petitioner. 10.2 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus/certiorari and quash/set-aside the Order dated 14.05.2008 and 24.12.2007, holding that the same is to be bad in law and contrary to the Municipal Cbrporation Act. 10.3 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay the operatton and effect of the order dated 14.05.2008, till the pendency of the instant petition. ).4 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper, be passed in favour of the petitjoner. 10.5 Cost of the petition." 3) The petitioner has neither pleaded in the writ petition nor Shri Pankaj Shrivastava, leamed counsel for the petitioner, during the course of hearing, could demonstrate any breach of petNloner's rtght, by the respondents vide Annexures P/1 dated 14.05.2(X and P/10 dated 24.12.2007, quashing whereof issought in the writ petttion. 4) In this view of the matter, the writ petition is liabte to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily. -- Sdf'- ChiefJustice Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge s'ad-ns j7-~i- 7