•^{f^ ^' ^— ——fi^^yi^.SSS^. ^,:-__f^g^t "<"^w^^t-' ^ ii c II! ( \^ sl J IN_THE.HiaHCQURTg£CHHATTISOARH_iB!LASPUR WntPetitioaM No,4522^ Petirtioner Respondents Shrimati S,A, Waghamar Versus- State of Chhattisgarh & ottiera Mrs, Renu Kochar, Adwx^ate ibr ftie petttioner, Ms< Sumta Jain, Panel lawyer for tfaje respoiidents/State, ORDER (Passed on 21st Day of Pebmaxy, 2007) Tliis order ofthe Court is passed by Justice Satteli K. Ag&lSiotirl^ J» 1. T'he petitioner, while working m Prmiasy Healfh Ceiitre, Devsundi1a (Paiari)^ Raipur, was traasferrcd vide order dated 2,11,99 (A/l), wherem the naiiie of fhe petitloxier was wrongly typed as Ms, S.C. Chand, Accoixlmg to learxied counsel appearing for fhe petitioner, it appears fhat the order was iiot nieaiit fbr fhe petitioner, Hcwever, fhe p^titioiier wae, fhereafter, reMeved aad wa8 not paid aiiy salary. The petitioner was wifbiout aiiy work. 2. By fhe letter dated 3.6,2006 (Rj/4), issued by the Deputy Secretary, Government of Chiiattisgarh, Healfh and Family Welfej'e Depai'toient, it appears fhat fhe letter was addreseed to fhe husbaad of fhe petitloner statmg fhat fhere was some enx>r crcpt in. tfae order passed ia ftie year 1999 aad fhe govermnent is taldng steps to cure ffaie saine aiid pass appropriate order, 3, On perusal, it appears fhat fhe ^weniiiient has admitted ite niistake, wfaereby fbe petitioner has suffered dxirmg thds penod. 4, The respondents are accordiiigly directed to pass appropriate order immediately after makmg necessary corrcctton ia tfae error, ifany, The respondeiits arc furfher directed to coasider paias aad suflering what fhe petltioner has undergoae diMiag this period on account of error, if any, made by the respondents. The respondents are farther directed to give a proper notice to tlie petitioaer to put forward her case before taldng any decision, m accordaiice with law, To fhis effect, fhe petittoner is at lifoerty to ixiake detaited representataoii before fhe respondents, If the representation is made, fhe saoie shatl be considered aad decided, in accordaiice wifti law^ within a period of four weeks jroni fhe receipt of fhe reprcsentation in accordaiice with law, bemg tmmflueaced by aiiy observation made, hereiiiabove, 5. The writ petitbn m accordmgty dispdsed of No order aa to costs, Certitled copy as per niles Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Bablu