R.B.Nayak v. Union Of India And Others
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
Cr^.i^^
IN THE HIGHCOURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WRIT P£T)T)ONN02^'?"/2005.Y' s ^) ^:
R. B.
Nayak, S/o Late Shri Jhapia PETITIONER \w/ ,w/ 0%%?'
v^ ^^ ^•\^> v ^v ./'
Nayak, 41-A HSCL Cofony, Ruabandha Sector, Po. Bhilai, Dist.
Durg (C.G.), [ Ex-employee of HSCL Bhtlai, P.no. 19001, crane operator, CEZBtiitai 1 :-lfrVERSUS ,<s'
RESPQNDENTS:
1) Union of India, Through : SecFetary, Ministry of Iron and Steel, Parliament House,New Delhr;'
2) Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd.
(A Public Sector Enterprise), through its Chairman - Cum - Managing Director, Kolkata.
Hindustan Steel Works w Construction Ltd. (Local Unit at Bhilai ) through General Manager, P.
O.
Bhilai, Distt.
Durg (C.O.) | jS|\Al^^w^WRtT PETlTIONUNDfeRAR'rtCLE 226/227 OFTHE l'otJE^^.C^^ONSTITUTiON N^^^ CERTIQRAR1 ANO l^ WRtTjLDlRECIiON/ QjRfifiR.
I -JS;.i.Si
M i^^ •i'^T^'
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUfi SB:HON'BLE SHRI NAVIN SINHA. ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Writ Petition No.2466 of2005 P.M. Shukla PETITIQNER
Versus
Union of India and others RESPONDENTS Writ Petition NoJ146tf)£ •R.B. Nayak f'ETITIQNER 7-4^^'.'S^~sfc^iL l',Usfi-flakfrSiWl Union of India and others ^w^n-~:'iRESPONDENTS i:MErttieti(Kl>n No.2468 of 2005 'i-ic^^q uRIrT Prayag Choubey PETITIQ^NER
Versus
RESPONDENTS Union of India and others Writ Petition No.4730 of 2005 PETITLOMER Sukaloo Ram
Versus
Union of India and others RESPONDENTS
^ And Writ Petition No.4839 of 2005 PETITIONER NiazAli
Versus
RESPONDENTS Union of India and others WRIT PETITIONS UNDERARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Appearanca is: fg jlli •I11 M ,..<iS|)ri1kJ®fn'Pandey, Advocate for'ffT8,Pej|G@ngrs. ..lii.lRI'fri N.K. Vyas, Assistant Solicitor GeneW!,jKByffijon pf India. g;|g''a°Shri Vinod DeshmLikbnAdvocate for ResponSgO&gi;,,, NAVIN SINHA, ACTIN©JfeUJ 1.
Heard LeameB.iifoiansellllfor the Petitioners and the Respondents.
^KV^ uTOt 2.
At the outset leave is sought to withdraw the applications. 3.
The writ applications are dismissed as withdrawn Sd//.
ActingChiefJustice sunita