Petitioner Satish Tiwari, aged about 44 yeare, S/o. Shri Ramnath Th'i'ari, occupation- Conductor, R/o. Qt. No.G-1, Polytechnic Cotiege, Durg, Distrtot Duig (CG). ResDpnaents 1) State of Chhattisgarh, ihrougri Secretary, Department of Transport, D.K.S. Bhav/an, Raipur, District Raipur (CQ. 2) Principal, Govt. Polytechnic Durg, Distt. Durg 3) Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd., Transport CeH Pandap/ Raipur, District Raipur (CG). \'- (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitu'tion of India) Shri Ajay Shmastava, counsel for the petltloner. Shri Yashwant SingnThakur, Dy. Aa'vocate Generai for the resoondents No. 1 anci 2/Stste. Ms. Pumima Singh, counsel forthe respondent No.3. (Passed on 1st day of May, .2008) • Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an employee of Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corporation (for short, "CtDC"), as respondeni No.3 is the successor Corporation of M.P. Road Transport Corporation (for short, "MPRTC") wherein the petifioner vi/as Initially appointed. fll ,i-» 2) The petitioner, by order dated 21-7-2003 passed bythethen CtiiefSecretar/, State of Ch'nattisgarh, was sent on deputation to Government Polytechnic College, Durg, The petitioner joined in the Government Polytechnic College, Durg and thereafter, the deoutation was cancelled on 31-5-2007 (Annexure P./l). The respondent No.3/CiDC bv order dated 6-6-2007 (Annexure P./2) deciined to accept the services of the petitioner and sent him back again to the Government Polytechnic ;IffiiiK • B^.^ S3S Cottege, Durg. The petitioner is without any job. The parent department without assignlng any reason is not accepting the sencices of the petitioner. The borraving department has refused to aceept the sen'ices of the petitioner. In view of controversy created by certain circulars, the petitioner is without job and is not getting salary since June,2007. 3) In view of controversy created by the aforesaid circulare, it is directed that the State will take appropriate action immediately to ensure postlng of the petitioner'as weli as grant of his salary, which is due and is not paid since June, 2007, till date. Needfui be done within a period of one month. 4) he petitlon is accordingly altowed to the above extent. §^/_ Satish K. Agnihotri Judge