Aeo Lal v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ANR.
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.
I $ _ Hg-i COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR
IN THE HONOURABLE
1cm M.c.c. No.
QZM'L OF 2014 f7 [Arising out of Order dated 01-08-2013 passed bV Single Bench of Hon'ble Sin 1e Bench in W.P.(S1 N0. 7614-[2010t Aeo Lal , ggTITIONER S/o. Shri Umedram Meshram, Aged about 47 years, \'ikb'd Véé'
,District-Rajannandgaon M "L/ R/o. Village -Kohaka,Post-Dongarhgoah ~' gww aw'
(Chhatt1sgarh) $ .
My § QQ\@ .V l ~ gNVP"
"a.Km 'g'f'
' :G"r '1 Va f $$ 3w§t§m '",w-'M
VERSUS
wff'
s"
S ¢§x§w NON-APPLICANTS:
RESPONDENT 1.
State Of Chhattisgarrh, Through the Secretary, Department of Higher Education , Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Mantralaya, P.S.
Rakhi, New Raipur (C.G.) 2.
Chhattisgath State Public Service _ Commission , Through its Secretary , Shankar Nagar , Raipur, (C.G.) M APPLICATION FOR REST '
"/TION OF WP. s No. 7 WHICH HAs BEEN TREATED As DISMISSED FOR NONPROSECUTION ON 26-04-2014 The above named petitioner/applioant most humbly begs to submit as under: - r had filed writ Petition before this That, the applicant/ petitione ndent n 'ble Court against action on the part of respo Hon authorities in not granting the benefits of "Green Card Holder" i respect of age relaxation.
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Coram: HON'BLE MR.T.P.SHRMA & HON'BLE MR.I.S.UBO_WEJA, JJ.
M.c.c. No.641 of 2014 Aeo Lal Petitioner ;'
,'
Versus
.
State of Chhattisgarh Resgondents "Q Chhattisgarh State Public Service Commission s ) No.7614/2010) (Applicatio H es mukh counselforthe petitib t geeta Mishra, Pangel Lawyer for responden I, 1 e N '
ne present for respendent yed for restoration of W.P.(S) a the ground of non-compliance of n the order dated 1.8.2013 pas:
d byJe'arned Single Judge.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has complied with the order within one week on 8.8.2013 and has tiled the paper book. but Registry has further pointed out that application for condonation of delay has not been filed. then he has filed application for condonation of delay on 23.8.2013, but writ petition has been dismissed on the ground of non-compliance.
3.
Record reveals that the petitioner has complied with the order Within the stipulated time, therefore, the petition would not have dismissed. .
Consequently, l.A.No.1 for condonation of delay in tiling the MCC is l allowed. Restoration application is also allowed and W.P.(S) No.7614/10 is 77/ restored to its original number. No order as to costs. 2/ ,3 Sd/- l Tl". Sharma Judge