@ \M > S.B. (Service Matter) IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUMCHHATTISGARH) WRIT PETITION(S) NO. g§§3 /2010. §§Nm§5 gwm z ,9/ PETITIONER: Mahesh Prasad Verma, son of Shri Ram Kripal Verma, aged about 61 years, Retired Vanpal, Forest Division Manendragarh, Sarguja Circle .x Ambikapur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh. VCI‘SUS / Respondents 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Forest Department, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Van Sanrakshak, Sarguja Area, Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh. 3. Divisional Forest Offlcer, Manendragarh, District Korea, Chhattisgarh. 4. RaJnashankar Tripathi, Retired Van Rakshak, Forest Division Manendragarh, Sarguja Circle Ambikapur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1. P§IICULARS OF THE PETITIONER‘S}: t ? WWW ammm mmm WWW fsQ°tm $WW V’J’ mmwgogwxséé/zooo mm (Wu) SB: Hon’ble Sin-i Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, J. 6.8.2010 Mr. C.J,K. Rae; counsel f0 r the petitioner. Ms. Sangeeta Mishra, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents No. 1 to 3, on advance copy. Heaxd on admission. Grievance of the petitioner as ventilated through this petition is that though the petitioner has c )mpleted 24 years of selvice and there is no adverse remark or penal1y imposed on ‘nim, beneht of second scale promotion has not been gianted, whereas, respondent No.4, who is junior to him, has been granted benetit of second scale promotion Vide order dated 26.3.2007. ?espondent No.4 was appointed on 17.5.1977 and he has been d entitled for grant of second scale promotion w.e.f. 17.5.2001, w ereas, petitioner was appointed on 9.5. 1977, however, the said ben ht has not been extended to him. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner Conservator of Forest/respondent No.2 on 8. .2009, but the same has remained undecided. submitted a rep sentation to the Taking into consideratio the nature of grievance, it would be proper to direct respondent No. / Conservator of Forest, .Sarguja Area, Ambikapur to consider and ta; e appropriate decision on petitioner’s h 1 W claim for giant of second scale promotion, consistent with the applicable policy. With the aforesaid observations, the petition is finally disposed off. Sd/— Manindra Mohan Shrivastava : Judge \9, I) mm W206 a mmqq’iaaqu) mam WWW WWW -Zf Wamtfwm amffananésr