> (AMENDED WKJT PETiTlON) iN THt HIGH COURT OF JUUiCATURE AT HlLASPUK CHHATriSGARM PETiTiONER RESPONDENTS ./?rf£y c^ W.P. N0. 2239 / 2006 ishwar Dayai Bhamagar, Aged about 55 years, s/o. Bal&ulai Bhatnasar, K/o. C.H.t.. uaaypur, Post Udaypur, uistnct burguja ILGI VERSUS 1] State of Chhattisgarh, inrougn: Secretary, FUDUC Heaith and hamjiv weitare ueDartment, u.x.b. bnawan, Kaipur ictai 21 Chtef .Medi'cat and Heai Offlcer, AmDiKapur, uistnct burguja i^.ij) jj uirector or Heaitn services; Kaipur, uistnct Kaipur (Lt-i) 4j t.ouector, Surguja, uistnct burguja (Lnnattisgarni WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTSTUTSO" OF !ND!A G^^' )NN^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONER WRTT PETITION No. 2239 of2006 Ishwar Daval Bhatnagar. VER8US RESPONDENTS : State ofChhattisgarh & Others. Writ Petition Under Ailicle 226/227 Qt'The Constitution Oflndia SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Aenihotri, J. Present: Shri Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate for the petitioner. Shd-i N.N.Roy, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents. ORALQiftDER :ar 1. (Passed on 16°'day of Febmary, 2010) Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 20. 10.2005 (Annexure P/10) wherein it is clearly stated that the penatty of wifhholding three annual increments without cumulative effect has been passed on 27.08.2005 and pursuant to the imposition ofpenalty, the petitioner was held not to be entitled for any other allowahces, except subsistence allowance which was paid to the petitioner for the period he remained under suspension i.e. fi-om 27.11.2000to 15.03.2001 Admittedly, the petitioner has not challenged the order dated 27.08.2005 whereby fhe penalty, as aforestated, was imposed. The petitioner confmes his challenge to the non-grant of other allowances except the subsistence allowance during the suspension period which was paid to him. 3. The question ofquashing ofthe enquiry report cannot be eonsidered as the, penalty has been imposed by order dated 27.08.2005, on the basis of enquiry report, which is not in question in the present petition. 2. Sf'^^^ 4. So far as non-grant ofother allowances except subsistence allowance is concemed, it is submitted by leanied counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner may be permitted to make a represerrtation to the authorities concemed for considering his case a fresh. 5. Accordingly, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to make a representationtothe authorities concemed. Inthe event, a representation is made, the same may be considered and decided in accordance with law, on its own merits as expeditiously as possible. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. 7. No order asto costs. Sd/- Satish K.Agnihotri Judge