c. ,s 1 r BCS.s'n S-aiff IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTJSGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITIQN No.^^O 12006 PETITIONERS <^^\\. ^ 1. Deepak Kumar Sawanee, Son of Late Shri Lalji Bhai Sawanee, aged about 51 years, Additional Superintendent Engineer, .^ C.S.E.B. resident of Sunder \G^'6>f, l^" ...•i1 »w ^y^.^"" ..AS'" h-y ^..-Nagar, Raipur (C.G.). ."'.;•''^^••"'"'2. R.P.Nigam, Son of Late Shri ^'sy'\..--"y"" i ^.^y'-^K-M.Nigam, aged about 52 ,!"t years, Additional Superintendent Engineer, C.S.E.B. resident of Deendayal Upadhyay Nagar, Raipur (C.G.j. YERSUS RESPONDENTS ";<> '%, pl o'' 'il^ Chhattisgarh Electricity Board, through its Chairman Dangania, Raipur (C.G.). Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board, through its Secretary, Shakti Bhawan, Rampur, Jabalpur (M.P.). ^BS^?a 8 m a fc ^ / 3. L.K.Chouhan, Son of T.C.Chouhan, aged about 46, Executive Engineer, Civil Maintenance Division, C.S.E.B. Korba (East). 4. K.R.Khoshley, Son of S.R.Koshley, aged about 48 years, Executive Engineer, Office of S.E. (Civil) H.T.P.P.S. C.S.E.B. KorbafWest). 5. A.K.Juhne, S/o. S.B. Julme, aged about 47 years, Executive Engineer (Civil), Civil Division, C.S.E.B. BhUai. 6. M.R.Bagde, Son of G.M. Bagde, aged about 40 years, Executive Engineer (Civil), Civil Division, C.S.E.B. Raipur (C.G.). 7. D.Nath, Son of P.Rai, aged about 39 years, Executive Engmeer (Area Stores) C.S.E.B. Bisrampur Surguja. ilif -Jr y • ~. ^' y 8. D.K.Kanth, Son of M.P. Kanth, aged about 45 years, Executive Engineer, Office of S.E.(Civil), C.S.E.B. Tifra, Bilaspur (C.G.). ^ WMT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. w^ TSf -ilWlcfi), ^Tny'ld, (tOKriy 3TT^?T Ma<ti ITWWT shii<*>-..''^.'Kil.NpJ'0^/ 2<3^ ^....VT.;.k..\i^.•••...gq- 200' 200 RIM 3fT^T!R<nWHfi(T *i<<l<'i41.< vmsi fffs^Q <Rtt<i< ^iSI^ITW^T 29/11/200i Shri Manindra Shrivastav i, Sr. Advocate with Shri Pravin Das, counsel for ihe Detitioners. None fo'r the respondents. t-ieara. Provisipna! gradation iist h^s bsen published by the Chhattisgarh State Eiectricity Board (hsncef^rth, "CSEB") vide notification dated 18/10/2006 inviting objections wit|iin two months. To chailenge the said gradation iist, petitioners have not| Issued revlsed proposed gradatioi^ invited, petitioners, if aggnsved, s fiied their objections. When CSEB has !ist and thereby objections have been fs required to fiie their objections within the stlpuiated oeriod. If oetitionersl submlt their oblections within stipuiated period. the Board shaii decid®thd same within two months from the date of presentation of the'r objestion^. in cass their objectlons do not find Tavour, and they fee! dis-satisfied| fina! aradation iis't or unfavourabll reDresentation. With the aforesaid direction,| in fhe iight of the above 10945/2008 and 10946/2005 stand they may, if so desire, chailsnge the 9 order passed against them on their writ Detition is disoosed of. order, M.W.P.No.4513/2008, i.A.Nos. ^_c^l.^L>—— dispossd ol Sd?- V.K. Shrivastava Judge (ift^y^) ^•.J