v—^'' IN THE HIGH COURT OFJErDICATUREGFCHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONER: ^ •Sb- \^y^ ^(A^^""" )^^ ^^- •fff' ^'sM y^.-- 'M RESPONDENTS W.P.(S.)NO. ^oS^ /2010 Tttam Kiimar Shrivastava S/o Shri I.C.Shrivastava, Aged about 43 years, Occupation Service, Presently posted as Sub Engineer (GivU) at Water Resources Division Raigarh, District Raigarh ;:':':,:',:;(C-G-):' : : ' :' '. . / t VERSUS I.'.StateofChhattisgarh Througil Secyetary , Water ResourGes Department, D.K. S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) 2.^ The Engineer in Chief, Water Resources Department Sihava Bhawari, Chhattisgarh Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3. The Divisional Engineer, Water Resources Divisipn, Raigarh, Distriet Raigarh (C.G.) WRTT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTn'UTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRrT IN NATLJRE OF MANDAMUS CERTIORARY OR ANY OTHER WRIT OF LIEE NATURE ETC. The petitioner most hutnbly and respectfully begs to submit as under : PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER:- As stated given in the cayse title above. ^^^ XI-HC—78 sii^i^ifynw WTW^TWflW f ^ 'ysS ^l^lri^, ©Tlly'lg,'f^TRiy ^..^.r..a.;..^.^.os.^o2oo sn^i'q^; (lic<(^^) wnwatefan^i SB: Hoa'Me Shri ManinAa Moban Shrivastawa. J. 30.6.2010 Shri Rajesh Kuiaar Sharmja; Shri Satish Gupta, Govt. advance copy. oja, couasel for the petitioner. ^dvocate for the State/respondents, on Case of fhe petittoner i^ petitioner's services were allocaljed which, he joiaed on 3*d April, ^ proiaotion fi'oia fhe post of Sub) (Civil) had taken place m the; St4te to fhc petitioner werc proinoted| notice of Supermfendjag Engine^r Rcsources, Raipur, vide his mcn4o recommended (h.c case of tli( pioiaotion, It is submitted that thou^t to the State Govenuueat recommendations dated 30.6.20fl)8 in thexaatter. Taking mto consideration ttus Court, it would be appropri^te 'kwfciil-t 'wi?if <t ft^ ^K?R •^ajfinsn^; that upon reorgasszation of State, to fhe State of Chhattisgarh, upon !007. It is 'submitted tfaat before that, LEiigineer (Civfl) to Assistant Engmeer of ChhattisgaA and pei^>ns juaior When this order was brought t^t fhe in the oiEBce ofChiefBagmcer, Water dated 30.8.2008 (Aancxurc P-3), Ite petitioner for graat of proforma pctiitioncr has made representation [iving reference to the aforesaid ^8, so &a~, no decision has toeen takcn jthe naturc of grievance raised before to duect respondent No. 1 to take XI-HC—1 sil^t w R'lf'fe W? W^W a)flf K'aweea ^•sr '<<!<Lii<n<<, <$T)ly4i<»,'f^rrey •sn^T'qire' (^I^^T) TRTOT^lftnsn^T —z' decision fa (he case of 30.6.2008 (Anaexure P-3) and petiltoner wifh reference to memo dated i>ass order in accoidance witti la(?. ,JNe^llS;s&ito emphasise, ^'i'i^tt^~ii'.^\^:^ ^^ redres^F,"KN?6iild be open fo^ remedy as may be avaflable to With the aforesaid obst disposed of. y fhc grievance of fhe petftioncr is tuot the pctitioncr to take accourse to such Uim under ffae law. 'wifepft^ 'wwif'ff ft*A <.i:'i<$!< ^aifOTWi^r :rvadons, the petition stends finaffly Sd-/ ManmdraMohanShrivastava Judge f •iS,; BS '•^; •s'^ ^^s ' 1X9,