mGH COURT OF CHHATTI^ABH AT BILASPUR PETITIONER8 RE8PONDENT8 WritPeWpn(C)No.5942of2®07 1.8fari Minerals, a PartnersMp finn, duly registered uader flie Partnership Act, beMing Re^stration No. 107/2006 having its office at Care of Vikas Medical Stores, Kawacdha, Ustrict KabinBiam (Chhattisgarii). 2.Nand KidKff-e Choubsy, 8/0 Shri Sumaat Prasad Choubey, aged about 51 years, Raffliakrishna 'Wssd Kawanflia, District Kabirdham (Chhattisgarii). VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarii tiirou^i Ihe Secretaiy, of Mining Mantralaya, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, RaqMir (ChhattisgaA). 2. Collector (Miaiing) District Kabinttiam (Chhattisgarii) 3. Superintandent of Police, Kabirdham (Chhattisgarh). 4. Station House QERcer, Polioe Station Bodla, Tahsil Kawardha, District Kabirdham (Chhattisgarii). 5. Shyam Tamboli, S/o N.R. Tamboli, R/o HataripMa, (Near Karpatri Paik) Kawardha, District Kabirdham (CUhattisgarh). (WfCIT PETTHON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTFTUnON OF INDIA) (SB: Hon'ble Mr. SatfshK. Aprihotri, J.) -:t Shri Ashish Shrivastava, Advocate forthe petitioners. Sbri Vivek Sharma, Panel Lawyer for fhe State/respondent No. 1 to 4. Shri Lokesh Pandey, Advocate fortiie respondent No. 5. ORDER (Passed on dns 14tt ofNovembcr, 2(W7) (I) Leamed counsel appearing for tfae petiticmffs submits that in spite of several represenfations niade to the respoadait No. 2 i.e. Colleetar (Muring), Kabirdham, for taking actions on illegal mining, agaimt the respondent No. 5., noflung has been done till date. (2) At tfris stage, leamed counsel appearing fw •Q petitionas furflier submte fliat fhe petitioners be pennitted to make a fresh application before the respondent No. 2 and the respondait No. 2 (Collector Mining, Kabwdham) be directed to take actions, as pennisstble in law, wifliin reasonable time, to which the learned ^ounsel appearing for Ihe reqwndents have no objection. Sdu (3) The respondent No. 2 is aecordingly directed to consider the representaticm, if filed, aad if necessary, make prcpa- investigation ani take ajyopriate aetions, in accordance wMi law, as eariy as possible, t»^eferably widiin a period of two mouths from the dats of receipt of &eshrepresentatiffli, filed by the petitioners. (4) In view of the foregoing, Ihe writ petition is disposed of with above du«ctions.No onfer asto costs. ,——- i Sd/- -~~—-'~- j Satish K. Agnihotri ; Judge