pl‘ ffzo/ IN TH E HIGH CR OUT O F CHHAT'I$ARH, !$.__;G AT — BILASPUR Writ Petition s) No. $7 3% 'L S , AGED 40 EAR, WIFE OF SHRI KAMLESH KUMAR SOI WORKING m ASSISTAN LIABRARIAN NATONAL 3NSTTUTE OF TECHNOLOGY RAIPUR CinTATTISGARH) R/ L1. 1, SECOR 4, DEENDAYAL UPADHYAY NAGAR RAUR RIUR, RPUR ( G) ERSU THRH THE SECTARY, ARE ANOR PLANNNG ECHNICL EDATIO, MANz/ILAYA, BWAN, RAIPUR HE DIRECOR TECHNICAL EDN, CHA TTISGARH, H Q B R. 3 THE M TEHNLOGY G E ROAD RR (AER OET ENG COLLLG) MT. NEEL AM soNI — r‘is N ~ T I I (—- O ..G T — , IP AP Diri‘T'RICT — AI c. . VS 1 STATE OE CHHATTISGARH, RESPONDETS N : OUG — RE DEPTMNT OE MPWE I & TA UCN Tiz D. K. S. HA T T UCATIO H v AVRON BAZAR RAIPU ANAGING DIRECTOR NATI< INAL INTIO STITUN DE CO AIPU ERII GVERMN GINEERIN E RIT-PETITION UNDER ARTIC, - F INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OFwWRIT IN THE NATURE O ANDAMUS OR SUITABLE DIRE ELION / DIRECTIONS ET Th ptii t ptfly bg bt s - e etoner mos resecul es to sumi a under : '1 . PARTICULARS OF THE PETETLONER — : c itl m ause te PARTICULARS OF THE RESPODENTS N - AS ab ler ove In cause tlt ( 'OF 2007 PETITIONER W Q 226 OF CONSTITUTION O F M L C. {xx N/A W W WWJWJK¢Wa7W m m mm mm mmmm—d S.B.:'HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. P ITINKER DEWAKER 14-12-2Wi0: Shri P. S. Koshy, Counself rthe petitioner. Shri Sumesh Bajaj, G.A. f the State/respondent Nos. 1 & 2. Shri Sachin Singh Rajput, unsel for respondent No.3. Dr. B. S. Chawla; Addition i Director, C.G. Tech. Education and Dr. Shrish Verma, Registr r (IIC), NIT, Raipur are-aiso present. The petitioner who is pres ntiy an empioyee of respondent No.3 and was earlier working wit respondent Nos. 1 & 2 has fried t7} the petition for the foiiowing reiief : / A) This Hon’bie Court ay kindly be pleased to pass an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus or suitable direction to he respondents for allowing the consequential m'on ary benefits of regularization w.e.f. 1.3.1990; - B) May kindly be gran ed fixation of pay, bonus and benefits of 5‘“ Pay C mmission. C) May kindly be pie sed to quash the order dt. 5.12.2006so far the as concern the period of 30 days which has been de lared as break in service and i i [Tfi‘a‘irft’ir'rl 1D8 EW,W.W3T am wail? Wmw"C§)§L”) ”ZOO W” \of) EW.WW.W am 11373.5 wflCS) 51¢! a7 m 111200 , Caunsel for the respondem dated 27.09.2005 has been res dated 18.09.2007 itself, the conSi be entitiement of the petitioner for getting those reiiefs which have been prayed in the present petition- Considering the facts and present petition is disposed of at are directed to consider at! the c the order dated 13.12.2010. it i expected from the respondents that they wilt pass an appropriat order within five months from today. Needless to say that t respondents will make all the efforts to resolve the dispute of e petitioner and wilt not create any further dispute. r the order by the respondents if the petitioner is not satisfied, she would be at liberty to file a fresh petition. However, even after passi The petition is accordingly isposed of. Sdl— Pritinker Diwakar Judge litia afari-x s fairiy submit tha as the order tored with canceling the order aquences of these orders would circumstances of the case the this stage and the respondents ims of the petitioner pursuant to l" h t