SE§=§§$E mm: @ J ’ ’mL IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION @I NO. &©(420F 2009 C/ €Dhanraj Tamarkar, S/o Late Shri Umend Saw Tamarakar, aged about 47 years, R/o Gandai, Ward No. O5, Tahsil ChuiKhadan, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) PETITIONER VERSUS f RESPONDENTS : 1. State rojrChhattisgarh, Through: the Secretary, Department of Urban Administration, Development and Locai Self Government, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantraiaya, Raipur (C.G.) 2. /The Director, Administration and Deveiopm‘ent, Raipur (C.G.) K 3. The Collector, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) The Nagar Panohayat Gandai, Through: the Chief Municipal Officer, Tahsil Chuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) , Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Gandai, Tahsil 5. Shri O.P. Thakur, ' Chuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 6. Gajju, S/o Seva Ram Soni, agedr about not known, g @ 7. Rajkumar, S/o Shri Johan Ram Shrfvas, aged about not known; 8. Dujlal, s/o , Shri Mehattar Ram Dewangan, aged about not known, 9. Rafiq, S/o Shri Jamsher Khan, age about not known, 10. Sukhdev, S/o Shri Ankalu Kumbhkar, aged about not known, Ashok, S/o late Shrf Kunjalal Kumbhkar, aged about not known, ' Bhanupratap, S/o Shn‘ Makhan Dewangan, aged about not known, Pancham Singh, S/o Shri Narayan Singh Dewangan, aged about not known, Respondent No. 6 to 13 are R/o Gandai, Tahsil Chuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Issue OF AN APPROPRIATE WRIT m THE MANDAMUS/CERTIORAR: ”ETC. 03 QIRECTION/ORDER IN THE LIKE NATURE ETC. MAY THIS PLEASE TO'YOUR LORDSHIP, showeth: - PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER. As mentioned in the cause title. d OF INDIA FOR HEGH COURT OF CHHATT§SGARH : B§LASFU§3 WRW PETmON §C2 NO.884? OF 2009 (WI§% petiiion under Articie 22$ cf the Constiiution ef indiaj Si§g£e aench : Hen’ble Shri 3atish K. Agnihot;§, J. Presen: :- $hri Rajesh Paadey, counsei for the petitioner. Shri $hashank Thakur, Para: Lawyer for the Staie. GRDER ORAL {Passed an this 23rd day of ember, 2009) i) With the consent of §eamed counsei for the parties, the petitiun is iiiweara' f?nai3y. 2) Learned counsel appearing fer the petitioner, on instructions, submSts that the petitianer does not want to cantest this petition on meme at this stage; however, ieamed counsei for the petitioner submits that the representatian dated 8—8-2089 (Annex-ate —- W5) submitted by the petitionea' is pending Geneieefation befere the respendent authorities and they may be directed to censidez’ and decie’e the same within a stipuiated beriod. 3) Learned counset apeeering fer the State submits that the pending representatton of the p'etitiener wouid‘be consideted and éecided, in accordance with iaw anti on its own merits at the eariiest. far the petitianer, naming survives in this petition tar adjudicatien. 5) Accordingiy, the writ petition is disposeti ct. 4) 7 in View of foregeing, awarding to the ieamed counsei appearing Sd/- ,ix i SATISH K. AGNIHOTRIif/t Judge 3 s i PET§T§ONER ‘ Dhamaj Tamarkar RESPGNDENT$ Versus