COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPIJR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 796 of2005 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS Mahesh Ram Gavel, Ex Forest Guard Aged about 39 years Village Bundeli P.0. Baldora Via Adbhar Tehsi! Shakti Distt Bilaspur (MP) VERSUS 1. State of Madhya Pradesh, Secretary Forest Department Vallab Bhawan Bhooal (MP) 2, ChiefConservator ofForests (Admimstration Non Gazetted) Office of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests Madhya Pradesh Satpura Bhawan Bhopai (MP) 3. Coriservator of Forests, Bilaspur Circle Bilasour (MP) 4- Divisional Forest Officer North Bilaspur (Territorial) Division Bilasour (MP) Sm^eBench: Hon'ble Justice Sim Satish K. Agnihotri Present: Mr. Abhay Tiwari, Advocate for the petitioner, Miss Deepali Pandey, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents. ORDER (Passed on 4ttl day ofMay, 2007) 1. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioaer submits that the petitioner was admittedly absent for a period of 91 days from 10.10.87 to ! 1.01.88 arsd second time, for 73 days i.e. from 23.08.88 to 05J. 1.88 on account ofserious physical problem ofhis father. The petitioner being the only male member, was m a state of eonfosion. Therefbre, he had to leave the workplace to attend his father. Thereafter, the petitioner moved an applieation for eondonation of lapse on the part of the petitioner snd the same coul.d have been treated as Leave Without Pay, The answering respondents, after havmg considered the reply, decided to impose the piinishment of compulsory retirement. 2. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner, at this stage seeks permission of this Coyrt to make representation before the Amit |lNl»<Ulfc competerst authority under provision of Rule 7 of the M.P. Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1965, as the Rules provides that in case of emergeiicy, the authority competent to sanction leave may, for tfae reasons to be recorded in writing, accord ex-post faeto sanction for leave already availed. The petitioner, being poorand having no source ofincome, intends to make a r^presentation before the authorities to eonsider his ease sympatheticaHy under provisions of Rule 7, to whieh the leamed counsel appearing for the resporidents have no objection. This petition is accordingly disposed of with a liberty to make representation, if so advised for proper relie^ before competent authority. No order as to costs, _—--—— Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge