N’vrz‘ AV 15? sxkk f7 .) ’A/xqE/u DEM? fi: TIT/0.!“ BEFORE THE MADHYA PRADESH ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BENCHI BHOPAL‘. W.P. (S! 2271(2005 APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 19 OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AQT. 19§5. APPLICANT Vijay Shankar Yadav, aged about 50 years, S/o Shri Heera Lal Yadav, Occupation Patwari, Tahsil Sarangarh, Distt. Raigarh V E R S U S RESPONDENTS : The (State of Chhattisgarh ;] L9 “ ‘ , Through the Secretary Govt. é“lw}4vfff« Of Chhattisgarh, Revenue @wate ' Department Mantralaya, r“ > kt i ' a?) - W‘a wagfr/ D.K.s. Bhawan Raipur c.G. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (Hon. Mr. Justice Pritinker Diwaker) .‘ Writ Petition (S) No. 2271 of 2005 Vijay Shankar Yadav V\ERS_U§ _ \ RESPONDENTS 3. In the return filed by the State Government this fact has not been disputed by the respondents that the petitioner performed his duties at Sarangarh during the relevant period. 4. From the documents (Annexures A—7, A—8, A-10 and A—11) it is apparent that after getting stay from the Tribunal the petitioner was performing his duties at Sarangarh till he handed over the charge on 13.5.1998 to one Sant Ram Chouhan. In view of the categorical admission by the State Government in paragraph 7 of the return it is apparent that after the stay order was granted by the Tribunal, the petitioner was performing his duties at Sarangarh. Though in paragraph 12 of the return a different statement has been made by the State Government, the same has not been supported by any document. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the petition is allowed. Order impugned is set aside. Petitioner is held entitled for the salary for the entire period during which he performed his duties at Sarangarh. ll u i l Sdl- ‘ Pritinker Diwaker i Judge