Mahetar Lal v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.
€) IN.
HIGH COURTCrF"CHHATT[SGARH AT BILASPUR (CG) WMT PETITION N0. 339^ /2005 Mahetar Lal, aged about 47 years, son of Shri Goverdhan Prasad Dewangan, resident of Sakti, Tah.
Sakti, Distt. Janjgir-Champa (CG) PETITIONER
VERSUS
.;>-'^€'(9>-"
The State of Madhya Pradesh - through - the Secretaiy, Madhya Pradesh States Reorganization, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
^^SPQNEENTS 1.
The State of Chhattisgarh - through the Secretary, Department of Coininerce Industries, D.K.S.
Bhawan, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2.
v'c^ © The Union of India, through - the Secretaiy, ]V[inistry of Personnel, New Dehli^ 3.
4.
^v '.^x>K:"^^< ^J^^ Madhya Pradesh Textiles Corporation, Bhopal, through - Its Authorized signatory, Bhopal (Madhya Pradesh) State Industrial Development Corporation, Raipur, through - Managing Director, WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR WPNo.1752 Of 2005 Panch Ram Dewangan The State of Madhya Pradesh& Ors.
---Respondent WPNo.1302 Of 2006 Khem L.al Dewangan The State of Madhya Pradesh &prs.
^ •;
WP No.6602 Of 2005 Ajay Kumar Thawait - ~~ Respondent WPNo.1620 Of 2005 Jagannath Pakhale
BJ :
%fe&^ !?
\J ^-'
WP No.1751 Of2005 Deep Chand "- Respondent WPNo.1711 Of 2005 Dukhi Ram Yadav > The State of Madhya Pradesh &prs.
MM Respondent WPNo. 3396 Of 2005 Mahetar Lal "- Respondent WPNo. 3292 Of 2005
...l.........-.^..,^^ Gayaram Gadhewal ^J^:..
''^^.-••r^ ~- Petitioner WP No. 3304 Of 2005 Hem Lal Dewangan --Respondent WPNo. 797 Of 2006 Yogesh Chandra Dewangan -" Petitioner m^ ForPetitioners 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 Order On Board
o.
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 left 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 VHf^