^ (1^\ ^•Itjfij sr-y^ '3^fj^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ICHHATTISGARHl W.P. (S) No.^^'?"/^Q 10 PETITIONER Rodhan Lal Sahu, S/o. Shri Kartik Ram, aged about 39 years, R/o. Mukam - Bothali, Post - Parsiya, Tahsil - Nagri, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) RESPONDENTS VERSUS (1) State of Chhattisgarh through its Secretary, Department of Forest, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) (2) Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division (Samanya), Dhamtari, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) (3) Depot Officer, office of Depot Officer (forest), Nagri, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^ .^2'.^ -^' ^..y^ :< /' A:""'':^l. ^ iX^HC-22^ 3TT^T^T •{^TR73n^T ^i^ ^[^a ^^ ^TRl^f, '^flWT^, t^TR?y 3{?^?T 'q?W ..^r.(?..-oi?.(]^?.:.1^ I^ •^•qra?""""'"'---""'"-""^ ^ ^< ^TH^lT^^lch •^^T' ^ni¥f'^n^: ^rftTT S,B,:_HQrBLBJU8TICB M.R. PEtlTINKBR DIWAKBR 16.12-2010; Shri S.P.Kale, corinsel for f}. Shri Smita Ghsd, P.L. for tli| Grievaiice of the petitioner tliough. he is entitled for his Guard, he has been regularized oj Shri Kale submits that th siich regularization order on the remams tliat tlie reguladzation jin the present petition is fh.at regu^arization on. the post of Forest the post. ofwa..tch.m.axi, petitioner has not ffled aiiy fcost of Watchnxan but fhe fact oijder has already been passed. Counsel for ihe petitioner have completed all the formalities] favour of the petitioner aad therel may be peiiiiitted to withdraw tl^ / to file a fresh representation be^ saaie inav be directed to be decic expeditiously as possible. subsJbiits Counsel for the State the fact he cannot raake any Goveroment is wiUiiig to regulad^ on tlie post of Forest Guard objection if the petitiouer niake autbority concenied aiid tbe accordaace witfa law. -L. Accordijigly, fhe petition i <=hl^id41Ti 1^W^Tf '9 'f^t iPn^K ^'3rf^W3:n^r e petit-ioner. ; State. submits that ttie respondents for passing necessary order iu bre at th.is sta.ge tli.e petitioaer preseiit petition witii Uberty bre respoudent No,,2 and tii.e led iii accordance with law as fhat wifhout ascertamnig fete.tem.ent whefher the State the services of the .petitioner k not. However, he has no a representation before fhe jsaxae is decided bv' it in disposed of with a direction that iii fhe event of aay representation filed by ffae petitj^e?73^ \ ,^,s.,, X|HC-22- ^^'ff'h. !T: '^, t-^/,-' - c\ (. ^^^^^ ^Sf -?q^|^R, -^ffH^, T^iray sff^yr 'V^K ^i^<rta ^^8^****''*'"**'*'*'** ^ '^r^y' 200 31^1-^T 'f^ri^snt^T 5h^ich -yf^a 3^r "^cnej3: ^rft^r before respondent No,2 raising expected to be decided by accordaace with law as expeditioi^sly It is made clear that fhis opmion on nierits of the case would be at Uberty to decide the strictly io. accordance wifh law aft^r position and the stateiEient inade 4 Sourt has not expressed any ^od the ai.i.tJiori.ty concenied spreseiita.tion of the petitioner er veri'fyiiig the correct factual it the bar. - ——— - Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge 4>l1L}id^T1 ^ll^dl'^'fe^ ^^K ^3:rf^R3TI^T his grievances, the saiae is he autliority concemed in as possible. [Tfr^ '^f^:rl