SiXitS :' :"3S 1 IN THE M.P. STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNftL, PENCH AT RfiIPUR (M.P.> ORIBINAL APPLICATION N0. OF 1998. (^)^ ^ ^.S'n [<?J^ (ORIBINftL APPLICftTION U/S 19 OF THE M.P. STATE ADMINJSTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ACT. 1985) ftPPLICANT PESPONDENTS I1 1 AMIT KftUMftR MftJUNDAR a aged years, son of Shri A. K. MAJUMftDftR, Driver, offieeo-f the Director Beology & fflini.ng, 'Khanij Bhawan'— Ralpur (M.P.) VERSUS 1. STfiTE OF MADHYA PRADESH, Through s Collector, Raipur <M.P.) 2. The Director, Geology & Minirig, •Khanij Bhawan' Raipur (M.P.) 3. Deputy Direetor, Beology & mining, 'Khanih Bhawan' Raipur, <M.P.) ORISINAL APPLICfiTION UNDER SECTION 19 OF THE M.P STfiTE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ftCT. 1985. 1. PfiRTICULARS OF THE ftPPLICANT s- fis de'tailed above in cause title. 2. PftRTICULARS OF THE RESPONDENTES ;- As detailed above in the cause title. PARTICULARS OF ORDER AOAINST WHICH ORI8INAL ftPPLICfiTION 13 FILED ; <i> ORDER No. i- ( i > 38637/45/Esfcablishment/N-Sl.-202/89 Raipur <ii> 8512-2S/Estab.-l/-N.Sl. 229/87 Raipur. (ii> DATE ;- ^iNNEXURE ft-l ^NNEXURE ft-2 <i> 27-. 10.83 (ii) 21.2.88 with reference to ANNEXURE fi-1 and ANNEXURE A- respectively.. • <iii> I88UEED BY ; 0-ffice of tt-iB Diractor, Beology Min.ing, Madhya Pradesh Raipur. IF ^ asK^^^'^js^^s^S^^sSSS^SSS^SsSs^ ^^:r^"j}'^^^;::^^l::^T=^U:,: 3wT -qiqic)«.UTi1'M<l<i, Rldl<iy'< w0^ *11*ldl ?BW V^ .P. ^S-J r^), sii^rwR'iiit) craTan^STtbiicb Tumane' 3II^?I q3@»(^cji^d^i) ^,200 E^iTtR^rfersii^r SB : Hon'ble Shri Manlndra Mclhan Shrivastava, J 03-02.2010 Shri Vivek Rathode, coun Shri Ajit Singh, Panel Law( With the oonsent of learrfe heard finally. By the instant petitun, regularization and regular pay sc( In the retum filed by the completion of minimum servioe already been regularized and j|i which have been given in the reti| Leamed oounsel for the been regularized and granted disposed of with liberty to appro^( survives for consideration. Aocordingly, the petition liberty to approaoh the him, still survives for oonsideraticln respond^nts i>i<ifCT<TI*i «II«ICTT^Tfs'StRntyt 'S dlRlt ail5<l el for the petitioner. ler for the State/respondents. id counsel for the parties, the petition is the petitioner was claiming benefits of ate. ^espondents, it has been stated that after oontingent employee, the petttioner has |ranted regular pay scale, the details of im. p^titioner submits that as the petitioner has regular pay soale, this petition may be ;h the respondents, if any other issue still .tands disposed of. The petitioner is at to raise any claim which according to Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge -Bl • iiri!!"