$Eng§@ gémzmh Cafmag/ \ IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. g 5é¢ /2oo7 PETITIONER : Dr.C.P.Agrey, aged about 50 years, Son of Shri C.L.Agrey, Medical Officer, Community Health Center, Bilha, District / Bilaspur (C.G.). VERSUS q/L . State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Health 85 Family Welfare Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.). J 2. Director, Health Services, Old Nurses Hostel Bhawan, RESPONDENTS \ Raipur (C.G.) 3. Chief Medical 8L Health Officer, Bilaspur (C.G.) 4. Dr.S.H.Shende, Medical Officer, Eye Specialist, District Hospital, Korea. 5. Dr.Devendra Nth Nag, Eye Specialist, Mobile Unit, District Hospital, Jagdalpur. 6. Dr. Kishoreelal Dhurve, Eye Specialist, District Hospital, Raipur (C.G.). 7. Dr. Ramchand Thakur, Eye Specialist, District Hospital, Kanker (C.G.). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. ‘m mama, Wm, WEI ”was? zgwm WW M 200 m WW (whaw) m $W aw aim WW mm m‘m am! Wim w?%t€R animanéw :CE PRITINKER DI£AKER $5 : HDN’BLE MR. JUST] 63.11.2aii Shri Vivek. $harma, c Shri Charmresh Statejrespondent No Nene for respanciem ounsei for the petitioneri EShtivastava, RL. for the 3 . 1 to 3. Nos. 4, 5, & 7 though served. the petitioner submits that Learned counse! far during pendency 0f this ‘rit petitmng the petitioner has already been promoted b t he has not been given the correct senioriw and th benefit of pay scale. He submits that the petiti ner may be permitted to withdraw this petition wit I liberty to fiie representation before respondent No.1 w o in turn may be directed to decide the same expeditio sly. Learned State cou sel has no objection if the petitioner makes represen ation before respondent No.1 seeking for‘fixation of cor ct seniority and pay scale. Accordingiy the petit oner is permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to file representation before respondent No.1 within t ree weeks from today and in the eventuality of filing any such representation it is expected that the same would be decided by the i to..-“ XI-HC-—78 . wrkswmlm WW FF}: 200 31m! WW (gigaga) wwgénk mw m—q: W5“ ’ m m“ mm. a; arm wwwwaa am cancerned authority in accordance with law as expeditiousiy as possible. It is made clear that this. court has not expressed any opinion on the merits fthe caee and the authority i concerned would be agL. iiberty to decide the representation of the petitioner on its own merits after due scrutiny of the facts, #“ ‘ ' sw- Pritinker Diwaker i Judge Lamewm Mi-“ f ‘