•t •3 ^^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. l/1.^0(^ OF 2009 -" PETITIONER r Dr. Rajendra Kumar Thakur Age 46 years S/o Late Shri D.R. Thakur occupation - service, Working as Assistant Professor (Geography) Government College Dondi - Lohara, District - Durg, Chhattisgarh RESPONDENTS ^^^ <i^>" ^Afc?l/. L ^A-'" .,-^p)""" ^^:^y" ^"" VERSU S 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through - Secretary, Government of Chhattisgarh Department of Higher Education, Mantralaya D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. Director, Directorate of Higher Education, Government ofChhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh ^ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OJ: THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT OR WRITSJN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS. CERTIORARI, PROH1BITION. DIRECTION OR DIRECTIONS, ORDERSQR ORDERS OR THE LIKE .J^..-._.__-.---.-. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONER RESPONDENTS WRIT PETmON (S) No. 4509 of2009 Dr. Rajendra Kumar Thakur. VERSUS State ofChhattisgarh & another. ^ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTrrLJnON OFINDIA SB: Hon'ble Shrf Satish K. Agiuhotri, J. Present: Ms. Anubhuti Marhas, Advocate fbr the petitioner. Shri P.K.Bhaduri, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents. ORDERrORAL) (Passed on 22nd day ofOctober, 2009) 1. Ms. Marhas, leamed counsel appearmg for the petitioner submits that the present petition has been filed on account of the tact tihiat (he representation dated 16<fa August, 2007 and 25ttl Febmary, 2009 (Annexure P/6 colly.) filed by the petitioner have not been considered and decided till date. It is further contended that two forums at one time cannot be resorted to. Since the representations are pending consideration, this Court may be pleased to direct the respondent" authorities to consider and decide the pending representations in accordance with law-, on its own merit as early as possible. 2. Shri Thakur, leamed Deputy Advocate General appearing with Shri P.K.Bhaduri, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents submits that the pending representations, as aforestated, shall be comidered in accordance with law on its own merit as expeditiously as possibl^ preferably within a period of ei^it weeks from the date ofreceipt ofa copyofthis order. 3. In view ofthe foregoing, according to leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner, nothing survives for adjudication, 4. Consequently, the writ petition is disposed of. g^ SatishK.Agnihotri Judge Amit