^iB^^Wfc»fe»S @, BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (C.G.) W.P. N0. .'...l^.L.... OF 2003, IN THE MATTER OF K.P. SHARMA AGE 45 YEARS / SON OF SHRI PARAS RAM SHARMA, / Sr. HORTICULTURE DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF MORENA (M.P.), AT PRESENT - OFFICE OF THE ASSTT. DIRECTOR HORTICULTURE, THAKUR PARA, KAWARDHA (C.G.) V E R S U S 1. UNIONOFINDIA THROUGH SECRETARY-DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCE AND PENSION, KHANMARKET NEW DELHI 2. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH, THROUGH SECRETARY, (AGRICULTURE) MANTRALAYA, VALLABH BHAWAN, 0HOPAL (M.P.) PETITIONER ^l^l^ .^•'^^v\^?> ^..-'' A^" RESPONDENTS 3. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH, THROUGH SECRETARY (AGRICULTURE), MANTRALAYA, D.K.S. BHAWAN, G.E. ROAD, RAIPUR(C.G,) ^r-TU ^^ f2€^^^^^ocefi^ ^/ <DQ^, ^ ^<e^~^ , ^^, Vfr^^-S T3>^wli Bk»^A?r / WRIT PETITION ONDER ARTICLE 226/ 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS. CERTIORARI AND ANY OTHER ORDER OR DIRECTION AS DEEMED FIT is:=£3afciMia ^-^—^^ L-- HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPLIR Sissgle Beaeh: Hon'ble Mr, Justice Satish K. Ags&il&otri. Writ Petition No. 1786 of 2003 Petitioner K. P, Shamia Versiis Respondents Union of India & ofhers Shri M. K. Bhadiid, Advocate for fhe petitioner. Shri S. K, Beriwal, Staiiding counsel for Respondent No, 1. Shri Sachia Siagh Rajput for Respondents No. 2 aad 4, Shri Pankaj Shrivastava, Panel lawyer for rcspondent No. 3, ORAL ORDER (6th Febmaiy, 2006) The foUowiag order of fhe Court was passed by Satish K. Agnlhotri, J. 1, L^amed cozinsel appeadng for fhe petitioner siibinits fhat the petitioner, who is worknig on fhe post of Sr. Horticiilture Developinent Officer ia the Agrictiltiire Departnient, is a pemianent resident of Distdct- Morena m the State of Madhya Pradesh, The petitioner has been altocated to fhe State of Chhattisgarh aad he waats his reallocation to fhe State of Madhya Pradesh, Leanied counsel for the petitioner, ou instruction, subniits that the petitioner be graiited Uberty to laake a representation to fhe respondents for redressal of his grievaaces. Leamed counsel appeanag for the respondeuts have no objection to fhe said submission. 2> In view oftiie foregoing, the petition staads disposed offiiiaUy, wifh liberty to the petitioner to zn.adke aii appropriate representation to the rcspondents/autiiorities concenied, wifhia a period of two weeks froin today, and fhe respondeiits/azithorities are dtrected to consider aiid decide fhe sanie, ui an objective maiiiier, in acconlao.ee wifh law, withiii a period of SDC weeks froni the date of receipt of fhe reprcsentation, if ajiy. _ Certi&ed copy, as per Rules. Sd/- Thakur Satish K. Agnihotn Judge