^'?."??£^£' ^s^'1 .i® <, THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH W.P. N0. ..........11.3.../2004 / PETITIONERS ..<•: / ^ 1 .-w'' i -^/vy ^< %y v e- ^^y <<^//' \y RESPONDENTS c^-^, ^'••^o' /y^£^\ *^-%5ITto^l &y^J •^.^U»n»—<' ''^ ^k ^^.y^- 7 r^ .4^1, o^^'^^f^ ,tf»s' ^•\;(^;^c?^ .0 <A .^.^ 1. Dr. Jyoti Kumar Jain, Aged about 42 yrs S/o Premchand Jain R/o. Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.) 2. Dr. Pratibha Rajul Jain W/o Dr. Jyoti Kumar Jain Aged about 38 years R/o. Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.) VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through -Secretary, Health and Medical Services, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. TheStateofM.P. Through - Secretary General Administration (State Reorganization cell) Ministry, Satpura Bhawan, Bhopal (M.P.) 3. Union oflndia, Through - Secretary Personnel and Training, Ministry of Personnel Public Grievances and Pensions Loknayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi (Reorganization Cell) 4. The Director, Health and Medical Services, ,°\ Raipur (C.G.) 5. Civil Surgeon-cum-Hospital Superinten- dent, District Hospital, Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.) 1— M/ ^ 6. The Chief Medical and Health officer, AmbikapyFrDisJfe^urguja (C.G.) WRIIT PETITIQN UNDER ARTICLE 226/227'OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDiA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI. MANDAIVIUS, PROHIBITION AND OTHERS SUiTABLE WR!ITS, DIRECTION/DIRECTIONS. ORDER/ORDERS 1 ^T 5a-HC-22— li !il an^tW Tsiiti 31^1 shW^ WSV 'To? «'<l'lll<'f^, aqla'w, iti'ii'My WWW Wliqi OT^T 1q@^i' ^......^^i^.Sl^...*n 200 an^TWllWtlfel il.2004 >hri Manoj Parasjpe, CQ'4 Shri Ranbir SiQgh, Govt.l Heaid. sy this writ petitiou' Constituti.on of ludia the petit dated 28.10.2002 (Anneaiuit GovenimeHt of ChIiattisgaTh ordered not to reKeve the' petil the State ofMadhya Piadesh. Brief facts leadiug to i1]iT)i petitioiier No. l is workuig as .tnselfQrthe petitioners. |Adv. for respoudeats No. 1, 4 & 5. ''t- ^ .. |uuder Artick 226/227 of tte tioners Uave chaUenged fhe order P-5) passed by the, State (|here1oy fhe State Govermnent has Ijioners for joiniag their services in. Ainbikapur and their ser/ices IK M.P. vide oider dated^IS. 10.20D2 Re-organization Act, 2000. submits. that the State Goverj oider dated 28.10.2002 (Arn^ex petitioners to join. tfaeir services| Leamed couiisel for the that the petitioners serAces 4. rclie^ing persoiis cpmes from ty. matter ia dispute isl 1 U-0 AAA.cX^t-^i. 'XJLJ. U.Xi Court dated 17.12.2(] Nos.516/3003, 174/20Q3, 604J this *Wf<'i<il-< 'WTclf'? ftt^ ^fSR^IT ^? s'lf'OT an^t ' ig pfthis writ petition are tha.t the Medical OfEcer and the petitiouer it Doctor in the Distrief Hospital, iave been ailocated to fhe State:of 02 (AnasxuTe P-l).uBdeF ffie'State counsel for the petitioners i.ent has no authority tb -issue fcxure P-5}^ for not relieviag tfae mthe StateofM.P. respondents No. 1,4 ft 5 . submits re to be "speared only when the e State ofM.P. | squarcly covercd t>y the order of K)3 passed in Writ Petition '2003, 877/2003 &828/2Q03 ia XI-HC-22 311^51 W f<ilit:t> ^K^^I *4t°h^f^f, ,.0 zvv- ,'J\ '3^-i|l*ll<'f''<r®qfa*ic,Rtclltiy NilCTI ai*<lch 3ni5r1E(gq:i' . ..^-'i..^.!.!^^ "m. .200^ an^T^iiw^ifet •£J ycs-te^a.i-i relievlne ttie witich the contention laisedl respondeuts has been rejecte^ of'the le'gal position tfae acti^ relieyiitg the petitiouers eaimc| aie entitled for relieving, as n^ India uor the date of relievl goveruuient including fhe Staj fhe order of Union of India f| rclieved on 27.09.2002, h<N extended up to 31.10.2002 granted. Therefore, inview of| siimlar petitiQns, I aia of ti opeiation. of tUe relievm.g onf caiuiot bel.sustained and the .'AccoidiilgSy, the 'petition is :] directed t6 relieve th.e Ceriified co'py as per Ru| .tionelra <*wf?i<B-f •<H<iTifftIzt (&<$!< ^3ipg»t3n^t, . i by fhe learued ..counsel for the aud it has been held fhat in view »n of the State authorities in not |t be sustaiaed and the petition.ers (ither fhe.order passed by Union of has been challeuged by aiiy (;e Govemmeu.t of C.G^. ansi as per jie petitiouers were required to 1?e ^•ever, the date .of relieviiig was laad thereEifter no extension was the above order ofthis Court in the (e opinion that oider stayuig the fter is wifhout any autiiOrily aad ^etitioners are entifled for relieving. ^llowed and the responderits aie Ibrthwith. , , . . ;s. Sd/- '-CBhadoo Judge ^ [TftS^rt