w^ Sinflie3e"c IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ATBILASPUR W.P.(s) ^o. fr~°^^ /2005 ^ Petitioner Respossdents Smt. Sumangla Das Aged about 85 years, Widow^f Mohan Lal Das (Security Guard), Rehabilitation Department, Mana Camp, Raipur R/o Block No. 7/42, Mana Camp Raipur. ^ ///\^ ^y ^^' Versus 1. The State of Chhattisgarh <^Through its Secretary ^•^ ' RehabTlitation Department, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) The State of MP Through its Conimissioner (Rehabilitation) Vindhyachal Bhawan, Bhopal (MP) The Accounts Officer, O/o Commissioner (Rehabilitation) Vindhyachal Bhawan, Bhopal (MP) /3. 4. The Commandant O/o Mana Camp Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ? WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^wf '-«i<4io«,y-t¥l^<i<i,Rirti<(-i^ *ii*ic»i^<n^ .^.•P;..AfSS3. 3n^$T^TR^icb ?CT3TT^$Td?*iJch ^ ^ SP/FS/2005-20,000 3TT^9Ttraq? (4c|i^6|«e{) ^200^ ?^Tr<f?^f^T3n^^T 20.10.2005 W.P.N0.4833/2Q05 Shri Gari Mukhopac Shri Pankaj Shrlvs advan.ee copy. Heard. Leamed counsel petitioner is niofher of latc substaative post of Seci3|rity further subraits fhat Moh^o. course of his eiQ.ploynien^ seivice benefits of tlie dec the petitioner for which fh|e For fhe present, les limited prayer fhat this p^ fhe petitioner to file a det^ Secretaiy of respondent ^ directed to dispose of th.| the stipulated period granjt This liraited pray^ petitioner is not opposed The saaie is atlowed If so advised^ lt is detailed represen.tatioii of writ petition before fli^ <PI<l[w<nr1 +ll<1oV^f'f«^l^R'1^1^ ^3lf^T3^«T [hyay, coiuisel for the petitioner. [stava, Panel Lawyer for tlie State ou |br tlie petitioner sii,bniits that the Mohan Lal Das who was worknig on tlie |rity Guard wifh respondent No.3. He ^ci Lal Das died on 18.6. 1985 durmg tlie He further subiaits th.at none of the a;ased Mohaa Lal Das have been paid to petitioner is legaUy entiUed, |raed cozinsel for fhe petitioner raaJses a ?tition niay be disposed of witih. Uberty to uled representation before fhe conceniGd o. 1 aiid the conceraed Secretar^^ may be representatiou of fhe petitioner withia ted by this Court. ;r m.ade by leamed counsel for the >y tiie State counsel, directed^tliat tlie petitioner niay file a wifh a copy of fhis order aiid a copy concenied Secretaiy of respondent No. 1 alpng ^c-m.-^~ w^.^^^-^^ \3w|^qiqiC)q, y-t¥|^^|<&,(^riN-l^ TPTOT ^TT^ 3TT^^T?CTR^Jcb ?PTT3Ty^^Td)^li<h ---^- ^ SK^- Wl200 3TT^9T ^afvf! (l?tg^) S^ITW^rfl^ 3n^$T - -2^- aad ifsuch a representatioiji aay other officer aufhorized objective maaner as early four moutlis from the date Wifh fhe aforesaid o| disposed of Certi&ed copy as per is fUed, ftie conceraed Secrctary or by hun, shall dispose oftiie same in.an |is possible prcferably withui a period of ]pf filiiig of such representation. ^seivations, fhis petition staads fiiiaUy jrules. cpl<ifo41<rl W;R?f^ffe^ ^Ri^K ^3if^T3TI^^T Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge SP/F9/2005-20,000 r. ^ •^ y