Hem Lal Dewangan v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

~r ll W i nfc: niUM UUUKi Ur UnnAI i lwUAr<n Ai oiLAorUM <UUl ^ VVKii rL:li<IUN NU.

/2QQ5 PETITIONER Hemlal Dewangan, aged about 42 years, son GT ^nn ivnorDanra Kam uewangan, resident of Dev Niwas Gully No.23, Ward No.16, Tuisipur, Dtstt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

VERSUS

^\^ y The State of Madhya Pradesh ~ through - the Secretary, Madhya Pradesh States Reorganization, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.

RESPONDENTS ..-rl The State^of Chhattisparh - through - the Secretary, Department of Commerce & IndustrieS, D.K.S.

Bhawan, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2.

/ /^ ^r {yy ^"'

The Union of India, through - the Secretary, Ministry of Personnei, New Dehii.

<"

cy'"

> Madhya Pradesh Textiles Corporation, Bhopal, through - Its Authorized signatory, Bhopal (Madhya Pradesh) State Industrial Development Corporation, %^\!

"} ^ ^// / Raipur, through ~ Managing Director, ^s^^ / ^-sss^^n- PETITION UNDERARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF JNDIA.

s^-

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR c WPNo.1752 Of 2005 Panch Ram Dewangan - WP No. 1302 Of 2006 Khem t-a! Dewangan The State of Madhya Pradesh & Qrs.

- »?• WPNo.66020f2005 Ajay Kumar Thawait "" Petitioner c.

-m Respondent WPNo. 1620 Of 2005 Jagannath Pakhale -

-\^ '/.

•^^ -- WPNo.1751 Of 2005 Deep Chand -- - WPNo.1711 Of 2005 Dukhi Ram Yadav - WPNo. 3396 Of 2005 • Mahetar Lal -- - WP No.3292 Of 2005

^'

Gayaram Gadhewal WP No. 3304 Of 2005 Hem Lal Dewangan petitioner WP No.797 Of 2006 Yogesh Chandra Dewangan • The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.

-- For Petitioners For respective None Shri P.K. Bhaduri, Govt. Adv. Shri Malay Shrivastava, Shri Gagan Tiwari, Shri N.K. Vyas & Shri Ayaz Naved, Advocates Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra OrderOn Board

-D 21/03/2016 1) The matters were passed over once in absence of any representation on behalf of the petitioners.

No one appears for the petitioners even in the second call.

2) In the circumstances, there is no other option teft with the Court, but to dismiss the petitions for want of prosecution. 3) Accordingly, all the writ petitions are dismissed for want of prosecution.

Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge t\ r