^ \^-6~} 4- IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARH) w.p.rs)No^^/ /20in d) PETITIONER ^ ....^^"^ .-<^ ^M^ ^'" ./Y?v3&f^^ ;.->::. ^:^>-" RESPQNDENTS ^^- .^ A^-.^' ^ Dwarika Prasad, S/o. Shri Ghanshyam, aged about 38 years, R/o. Mukam 85 Post - Dugli, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) VERSUS (1) State of Chhattisgarh through its Secretaiy, Department of Forest, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) ^(2) Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division (Samanya), Dhamtari, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) (3) Depot Officer, office of Depot Officer (forest), Nagri, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA I-HC-22 ^T^T^T [<rli?b 371^1 5h^icb <if^a ^ ~^s[ ^i^lld<Lt, ^Tll^^Ks, fG«rtl^il< ^l*icrtl $b+<lcfr 3iTif?r ^ra^ _....W:;£t..^...ftfcj_Di ^' /to ^^ ^^ ^ 'f^^" 3n^?T'^TT^R ^Tf^T S.B.: HON*BL]B JUSTICB MR. tfRITINKER DIWAKER 07-12-2010: Shri Vmod Deshmukh, SIiri Vaibhav Goverdhan, coiinsel for Gnevance of the petition^r that fhough he is entitied for hi|s of Forest Guard, he has been| watchman. petit^oner Counsel for the respondents have completed al} necessary order in favoiir of th^ this stage the petitioner inay b^ present petition with liberty to| before respondent No.2 and fh|( be decided in accordance wit|h possible. subDtiits Counsel for tlie State tlie fact he cannot niake aay Govemixient is williiig to regulanz^ on the post of Forest Guard objectiou if the petitioner makes| authority concemed aad the accordaiice with law. <=:bi^T<n<flri 'HTrof ^^^ <f^^i< ^ ^STf^FT vSTT^T the petitioner. \L. for fhe State. in ttie present petition is regularization on fhe post regularized on the post of submits that the fhe formalities for passing petitioner and therefore at ? permitted to withdnaw fhe file a fresh representation same may be directed to law as expeditiously as fhat without ascertaiaing itatenient whefher tlie State the services of tfoe petitioner not. However, he has no a rcpresentation before fhe saoie is decided by it ia 4r 4- [Tft^ ^N ^TT^T'^T f<rli<=b 3T1^?T 9^^icn ^f^a ^Ecf ^|Hld<LI, ^Tl1<H<i<5< fG«yll^y _....t4...fc.tel..&yi^/(° ^W^{ 5b^l<=b "^ 200 •I^^ST' ^TI^I'^n^R: ^rf^T Accordtngly, fhe petiticj direction tliat tn the event of] the petitioner before grievances, the same is authority concemed in expeditiously as possible. ^n is disposed of with a any representation fUed by No.2 raising his to be decided by the alccordance with law as resp^ndent exp^cted tihlis It is made clear that any opinion on merits of concemed would be at liberty of the petitioner strictiy in acccj Coiirt has not expressed tljie case and the authority |to decide tfae representation ^rdaace with law. <=ni<4l<yi<i1ri tm^ff ^ fi^ <psi^i< IT 3?rf^FT 3TT^T Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge [Tft^ y^