INTHEHlGrHCOURTOFeHHATTISGAKH AT BILASPUR Wrii Petitton N0. 4 $~/ /2005 PETITIONER n-^>^ <^-"^€e ^'""^-•ff^ 4, .^--''''-••^1 ^-f^ % RESPONDENTS ^ ^^^ ^~^y^' ^' ^^"^ 's^ :-^^ V- Mohd. Kasif Qureshi S/0. Shri M.Y. Qureshi -^l l^-^yA^> Aged about 35 years, P^^s'^f^^'^L' OccuEiation-Astt. Drafsman At Present R/o. H-121 Kashiram NSgar, RaipurfC.G.) VIE^RSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through : Secretary Public Works Departm.ent D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) -2; Ghief^rchitect Guiu-Chief Engiaeer R.D.D., ^P.'W.E)., Satpuda Bhawan Blaopial (M.P.) ^S. The EagitieeF in Chief Public Works Departnient : ida Bliawan, Bhopal (M.P.) TS.^^^%%^%^~^"'''*"''''; ^-4. TKi^^ecreta.ry' ''' ^ ^ Public Works Departinenf Vallabh Bha/wan Mantralaya Bhopal(M.P.) ^S. The Engineer in Chief ; Seerpur Bhawani Civil Lines I Raipur (C.G.) /--^§. TIi^Ualion of India Tlirdu.gli Dlreetbr DepartQient of Personnel &^1'raityag Minis^Ey &f|PeFSQi^ pytolic GrievaiiceS j& Flensions ^^ •»i s' Gov^. 'KSiaea. o£In.dia, IiI:I-II']|@|ir,,': iIaiSk.•Nay^ik Bliialwajn Mai<Ke't, ?]'<few;^l3!eifiii']!l:0-0i03: :MM sl 'IM tf M II z II W^RlTPETmoN^T/A 226/227 OFTHE eONSTITUTION OP INDIA XI-HC-22 3^ 'WIRra', »Tnu']S,Rtdltl^ 311^1 lach i 11*<rtlsh*<i* •v""-l-;"^-n'"'^- gq- 2005"^ SSf^Wf f?;iNi3n^?r Sh"H ?l1^(T 127-4-2005 Sii^lSWllWdf^cT On a mention being mdde, th' Miss Sofia Khan, counsel for Mr. Bhaskar Pyasi, Ponei ^espondents No.land 5. '. Mr. Raghavendra Pradhan;.,, ^espondent No.6. Heard. . The petitioner has filed th i ^rder ailocating his services td reorganization of the erstwhile S ^gainsttheoptiohgivenbyhilnfo^ The petitioner is working a^ Works Department. The petition |the State, the petitioner, beicig ^ Madhya Pradesh, gave option for ^ of Madhya Pradesh, but a9ainst h IStdteof Chhattisgarh. Further cc^ paid employee and he is respondent No.6 Union of India oughttohavedllocatedhisservice ^ matl-er is taken up for hearin9. the petitioner. L<4uyer for the State of Chhattisgarh/ ^tonding Counset for Union of India/ resid^nt olft °hl<<If]<n-1 11HdTffte<^l'<fa|«ll ^i3if^i)'3n^T ^ wpit petitionbeing aggrieved by the the State of Chhattisgarh after f-ate of Madhya Pradesh on 1-11-2000 the State of Madhya Pradesh. Assistant Draughtsman in the Public sr's case is that on re^rgonization of permanent resident of the State of illocation of his services to the State s option he has been allocated to the seof the petitioner is that he is a low of Madhya Pradesh therefore, fter consulting respondents No.l & 4 3 to the State of MadhyaPradesh. XI-HC-22 3^''<ii<iis'i<<, »Tn'M'i(B, Ricxyy, 3ll^l<<^ch HIIWI siwra>^^•^.^^.l.l..^.. .„, ^.-.•r...'»....^r^.y.^ 200.^ sn^r^r f^iNian^r sbHi'bflfer <- sii^i ^•wiwdfsa' Learned counsel for the came t6 the State of Chhatti^garh 2002, thereafter he made representations have not been submits that on the option givsr| Chhattisgarh gave no objection States of AAadhya Pradesh, ouid consent for retaining him in the to that, tfae petitioner's seryic^s Chhottisgarh by Union of India. Therefore, in the petitioner further submits that representation to Union of Indi^ Madhya Pradesh, and respond4nt representation within a period d[i appearing for the State of ChhajH'isg of India/respondent No.6, have Having heard learned cou^s facts and circumstances of thel request made by tearned counse to dllow the petitioner to mak^ through respondent No.l within \1 <tll<lf<'l<n-f HIHClTfffetA<Rl+<ll< ^3f1^iT3n^r ^etitioner submits thaf the. petitioner ^garh only after ailocation in the year several representations, but those considered. Learned counse! further by the petitioner herein, the State of labout his allocation of services to the l'"\ • • ^he. State of Madhya Pradesh also gave Stateof Madhya Pradesh, but contrary have been allocated to the State of circ|jmstgnces, learned counsei for the jthe petitiener may be allowed to make a through the Statss of Chhattisgarh & No.6 be directed to forward his if twQ months, to which learned counsel hhaflH'isgarh/respondents No.l & 5 and Union objection. |sel for the parties, having regard to 1+ie cose, and having regard to the limited for the petitioner, it is Just and proper a representation to respondent No.6 5 dnys from today, on receiving the said -trfiAM ItlO XI-HC-22 3^ •A|l'i)IC1<l, »TflwiS,Rlptlti^<. sn^T W( 200^ sn^rw R'fi'bsn^T SBIHiqitfRn Bil representation, respondent No.l No.4 wifhin two months thereol respondent No.4 shall also consic in an objective manner and foi comments and opinion withm respondent No.6 shall pass ^ppr after considering the another three mohths thereof. With the obseFvations c stands disposed of. Consequently,. M.(W.)P.No Stand disposedof. Parties are entitled for cei recom menOations qil<l[cl<fl-< 1411(lTffteI^<Rl«K ^3^tIT3TI^T shall forward the same to respondent giving comments and Qpinion, in turn, jer-the re|yesentation.of the petitioner j-ward it to respondent No.6 with its an4>ther two months thereof, thersafter, (opriate order, in accordance with law, made by both the Stdtes within (prdered accordingly. ^nd directions aforesaid, the petition 1377/2005 and I.A.No.912/2005 also •tified copy of this order. Sdl- L.C.Bhadoo judge