BSM ll^ F FFN^I-1 c^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHATnSGARH) W.P.f8)No.c)-i2^ /2010 PETITIONER ^y ^'^:'\. '•^A.-'" ?k%^)"' Vs^" ^••",^A>- RESPONDENTS Sonaram Yadav, S/o. Shri Itwari Ram Yadav, aged about 42 years, R/o. Mukam & Post - Nagri, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) VER S U 8 / (1) State of Chhattisgarh through its Secretary, Department of Forest, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) '€'%: .' ®{3M. j 9 (2) Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division (Samanya), Dhamtari, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) (3) Depot Officer, office of Depot Officer (forest), Nagri, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE^26THE CONSTITUTION OF LNDIA pSSsStK^* ^TT^T^T ^Jcb STI^T 9h^i<=h ^f^a T ^S[ ^|t^t|crt<4. ^Tfl^4!^, ^Krll^y s'n^r '<75ra? ^.......^..e...^A.y^ ^l^dl 5h*<lcb '^^sr' 3H^T'^cff^T'^1t?T S.B.: HOSI'BLB JUSTICB MR. PRtTINKBR DIWAMER 07-12-2010; couriisel Shri Viaod Deshniukh, Shri Vaibhav Goverdhaa, P.] Grievaace of fhe petitioner ftiough he is entiUed for his regul| Guard, he has been regulanzed orj Counsel for fhe petitioner ^ chi<4(<n<fli 'RTH^ff ^ fe^ <f^<^i< '^3Tp<m3Tr^T for the petitioner. L. fbr fhe State. bi tlie present petition is that arization on fhe post of Forest fhe post ofwatchiaan. iubniits that tibe respondeiits have coxnpleted aU the foroialities |for passing necessary order ra favoiir of fhe petitioner aad fheref^re at this stage tlie petitioner may be permitted to withdraw th^ present petition with liberty to file a fresh representation bef^re respondeiit No,2 aad tiie same iiiay be directed to be deci^ expeditiously as possible. Counsel for fhe State subrtuts the fact he caanot niake any ^.tat Goverojaient is willing to reguladz| on the post of P^orest Guard c( objection if the petitiouer raake^ autihLority concemed aiid fhe accordaace wifh law. Accordisigly, fhe petition i^ fhat in. the event of auy before respondent No.2 raising represe^itatt ed ia accordance witli law as that wifhout ascertairiing ^.tateiaent whether the State fhe seryices of the petitioner }r not. However, he has no a representation before t±ie |same is decided by it m disposed of with a directioxi itation filed by fhe petitioner his grievaaces, the same is [Tft^ y<^. F I-HC-22 -^cT ^t<41d<4, ^Tl1<H4i<o, fc^ni^y sn^r ^ra^ ^l+<^1( ^^^——..——..——...^F^ ^^ '^^sr' ^TT^T^T f^-lich 3Tli?T 5h^ich ^f^a 31T^T'^TT^T ^rf^T expected to be decided by accordaace with law as expeditiou^ t^ie authority concemed in t»lyas possible. It is niade clear fhat tihis ( opiaion on merits of the case wouM be at liberty to decide the re strictiy ia accordaoce wifh law. pourt has not expressed any 4nd the authority concemed (presentation of the petitiouer <^l^(<yl4ll 'RTR^f ^ fe^ ipsl^K ^ 3Tp<R 3?TT^T Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge t^ "^fe^