,^ V?' ....^•••••" s^^^.ss^.^"^- f^^-^^2-^^ e4F?t IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR fC.G.) w.p.rs^No. //^9£ /2010 Dr. D.R. Sharma, S/o- Shri Radheshyam Sharma, Aged about 52.years, Presently working as Assistant Medical Officer (Ayurved Officer), Ayurved Aushdhalaya, Kukdur, Distt. Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh. PETITIONER VERSUS l.r State of Chhattisgarh, Through-Secretary, Department ofPublic Health and Family Welfare, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ;. Director, Indian Medicine & Homeopathy, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3. Collector, Kabirdham, Distt. Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh. ^' 4. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat-Pandaria, Distt. Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh. 5. Superintendent cum District Ayurved Officer, District Ayurved Aushadhalaya-Kabirdham, Distt. Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA br S?I^T^T R^ '^TW^ST^RN? \' \ ^b' '<?W?n W^i^a •g^ ^I^IQI^ '^ftw^, f^TRT?T _..te...LfeJfe.-...^''Mi.?. 3TI^T-q5!^(T5?t^sr) i^nw^ft^^T^y SB : Hon'ble Shri Manindra Mohan 09-08-2010 Shri Pankaj Shrivastava, coun^e Smt. Smita Ghai, Panel Lawyei) Heard. Case of the petitioner is that "Vaidhya" in the year 1988 by the De| Welfare, Bilaspur and was posted at 4 Janpad Panchayat Pandaria, District State Govt. passed an order taking) including Ayurved Aushadhalaya, Kuk(| Learned counsel for the peti| petitioner was transferred to the Ayur has been working there. Grievance ci Aushadhalaya, Kukdur was taken o\ order with regard to absorption of senj passed till date. From the letters/corresponden| record, it appears that the matter is respondent authorities and final decisi has not been taken. Accordingly, it would be of. representation with regard to his grie\ ^FRf^^ W^ff ^tt^ lf^?H iR'-st^T^I^T tirjvastava, J. al for the petitioner. for the State on advanoe copy. the petitioner was appointed as ^uty Director, Panchayat and Sociai /urved Aushadhalaya-Mohtarakala, Kabirdham. On 31-03-1989, the over 126 Ayurved Aushadhalaya ^ur tioner submits that later on, the /ed Aushadhalaya, Kukdur and he the petitioner is that as Ayurved er by the State Government, but •ices of the petitioner has not been |)es which have been plaoed on Ipending consideration before the i|on with regard to petitioner's oase )|sn for the petitioner to make /|ance before the respondent No.1, -.FS/147—2/2010—1,00,000. .^ ^^-^, . "^'',.' ^o-^S^'' XI-HC-78 '3-s[ ^i<4i<n^, ^•al-M^Ko, f®!dl^!j,< ^-...ly...f:.Cy..r<Y:.91l4.lL^ »<l*l?ll w*<l<^ ••-•-••••••—-••••••••••-—f--y^ 200 3TT^?T TT?W ( ^i^^) ^n^T^rf^ri^ ^^ W^?T shNJcfr) Tumane \. 'P3cHW^rf^T 3;H^T — who shall take decision on the said n law. Needless to .emphasize, in cas< remain unredressed, he would be at remedy as may be available to him undi With the aforesaid direction, the <^i^fa<sfli ^TP^ff ^ fsl<l <Fsf^i< ^^tRma^i tpresentation, in acoordance with |, grievance of the petitioner stitl lliberty to take reoourse to such tr the law. [)etition is finally disposed of. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge