Brijesh Pratap Singh v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 2425 of 2020

1. Brijesh Pratap Singh S/o Raghvendra Pratap Singh Aged About 23 Years R/o.37 Mandirpara Satyanagar, Sirsi District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Neetish Parmar S/o Indra Pratap Singh Aged About 31 Years R/o 23/2 Manendragarh Road, Ambikapur District Surguja, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through : The Secretary Department of Law & Legislative Affairs, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur Atal Nagar Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary General Administration Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur Atal Nagar Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

-----Respondents For Petitioners : Shri N K Sinha, Advocate. For State : Shri SC Verma, Advocate General with Shri Vikram Sharma, Dy. GA.

Hon'ble Shri PR Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice & Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order on Board Per PR Ramachandra Menon, CJ 19.10.2020

1. The petitioners have moved this Court with the following prayers :- "10.1. That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to produce the entire records pertaining to the instant writ petition. 10.2. That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ/order/direction holding and declaring that the Chhattisgarh Lok Sewa (Anusuchit Jatiyo, Anushichit Jan jatiyo Aur Anya Pichhade Vargo k Liye Arakshan) ( Sansodhan) Adhiniyam, 2011 (Annexure P-1) is illegal and Utra Vires the Constitution of India. 10.3 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ/order/direction holding and declaring that The Chhattisgarh Educational Institutions (Reservations in Admission) Act, 2012, (Annexure P-2) is

illegal and Ultra Vires the Constitution of India. 10.4 Any other relief(s) that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of this case."

2. Heard Shri N K Sinha, the learned counsel for the petitioners & Shri SC Verma, the learned Advocate General representing the respondents/State.

3. When the matter is taken up for consideration, it is brought to our notice that exactly similar matter ie (WPC/2371/2020) had come up for consideration before this Court on 14.10.2020 and the said matter was permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to the petitioners to file intervening application in the pending writ petition involving the similar challenge.

4. In the said circumstance, the learned counsel for the petitioners seeks for permission to withdraw the writ petition without prejudice to their rights and liberties as above.

5. Permission is granted.

6. The writ petition stands dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- Sd/- (P. R. Ramachandra Menon ) (Parth Prateem Sahu) Chief Justice Judge Jamal