•^ ^•- •&' jt?P^^?^^^^^^^^^^^^^8^^S^^^^%%il%%SSN IN THE MGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH ^35-//DA WRIT PETITION (S) N0. (3%U /2QQ6 ,^ ^/ ^?^/ •y^S, ^w'/ ^yfy/ ^7 ^r/ ^"'j' <</'/J 1. P. R. Sahu, S/o- Shri L.R. Sahu, Aged about 42 years, Presently working as ChiefExecutive Officer, Janpad Panchayat - Nagri, Distt. Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. PETITIONER VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, Through- Secretary, Deptt. of SC, ST & Tribal Welfare, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS, CERTIORARI ETC. XI-HC-22 s^'aTra^CT,®^^^)^^^ XI-HC-22 'SS! -^WW^, ®T(1wi6,Rl<11(iy H1W(TS6*I1^ Sii^i 4a<t» Lt').Y5.23^~~( ****+**+•*+••»+******;Wt 200^' R<i<A 3I1^?T9iT R-li<t>3II^T snii'b ufcn aii^iii ^•wiWBfer <:hl<lfcl<fl-< H11flTffr6'<3 <Rlt&K »t;-?f^'R'3TI^T 11-7-2006 Mr'. Pankoj Shrivastava, couns Mr. Sumesh Bcy<y, 6ovt. Advo |ei for the petitioner. |:ate for ths State/respondent, on cdvcnce cooy. Hscrd both the counsel. By this writ petitlon under Ar)t'ic!e 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has questioned the pn 6-2006 passed by the respond^ transfert-ed from &hamtari to Keshil Tne main 9f'ievance of the p^ fr-om the diseas®of sickie celi anem' transmission 3-4 times in a year. whereas, at Keshkal, there is no dis'] ppriety and legaiity of the order dated 28- ,nt, whereby the pstitioner has been m. ititioner is that his daughtsr is suffering i0 for which she requires to under90 blood At C)hGmtari there is a distr'ict hospitai, •rict hospital and moreover, the petitioner haa completed oniy l-4 years at &iT|amtari, as such, thfere is genwne personai difficuity of the petitioner and ti^e same hos not been considered by the authoi'i+iea. Learned counsei for the Isetitioner submits that therefore, the petitioner moy bs aliowed to make ^ r'epresentation to the respondent r'aiS!n9 al! these grievancss and the respofrdent be directed to decide the some, to which ieorned counsei appeoring for Hovirig ^ieard iearned counse! the State/respondent has no objection. ftir the psr-tiss, having regard to the facts snd circumstcnces of the case and Ijifithout expressin9 any opinion on merit of the csse, the request made by learjied counsel for the petitioner is just, fair and r'ecisonable. Therefore, the isetitioner is allowed to make a detaiied (^y^) '^^Triiiii'riirT^iT^^s^ ''SK':-'^-&Sss:Ssi^taiiJtMS!^^^^S& XI-HC-22 ! 3^3(T2IRW, STntl'IS, RlMltiy 3ii^i <4Wh i iini sniitn " ••••••• • • ••"•—• y g^ 200i^ (d'b.A sn^TW R-li*3TI^T sn*ii°t> tfRa 1Wf< ;oma <^ ^ 'Q:'y'^v ^ ^ -^ aii^iii gwiwafer rspresentatiQn raising aii his 9rievsn<) the respondent within ten doys fron^ decide the repr'esentation within 301 considerin9 tha points raised by i-^j accordance with law. If the petitione^i relived, til! the decision of the repre; With ths directions aforesaid. Consequently, M.(W.)P.No.257r disposed of. Parties ore entitied for certifj |es annexing a copy of the writ petition to todoiy and the respondent is directed to |days from the dats of its receipt iaftsr ^ petitioner, in an objective manner, in is not already relieved, he shouid not be ientation. the petition stands disposed of. 7|4/2CK)6 and I.A.No.6582/2006 also stand 111<<Ic]<fl-t IIIClTff te3'<Rltd]< ^agi^tTsn^r led copy of this order. Sd.'- L.C. BhsaBO Judge (-fl^y^)