HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILAsPUR DIVISION BENCH : ON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV 6m, c.J. a ON'LE snm suuu. KUMAR mHA, J. : 1. anjay Shrivastava, aged abéut 46 Petitioners years, S/o Late Shri Harishanker Shrivastava, Junio Data Entry Operator, Tahsi Office Baikunthpur, Distt. Korea (C.G.) 2. Chandrakant Tiwari, aged about 50 years, S/o Late Shn’ Keshavram Tiwari, Junior Data Entry Operator, Tahsil omce Manendragarh, Distt. Korea (C.G.} 1. State of hhattisga: Through ecretary, Revenue ,epartment; S D Mantraaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G. 2. The Commissione, Lan Records, Raipur (C.) 3. The Deputy Collector, Land Records Branch Korea-(C.G.) The Tahsildar, Manendragarh (C.G.} The Tahsildar Baikunthpur, Distt Korea (co) 6. State of Madhya Pradesh; Through Secretary, Revenue Department, Vallabh Bhawen, Bhopa! (M.P.) 7. The Commissioner, Settlement 8:: Land Records, Gwalior (M.P.) 8. Manager, MP. State Cooperative Oilseed Growers Federation Limited, Hoshangabad Road, Bhopal (MR) 9. Union of lndia, Through Secretary Department of Personnel and Traim'ng, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Personnel, New Dethi. w t Comm H 65 ,HB s Writ Appeal No.21? of 2008 APPELLANTSI S r ! Versus RESPONDENTS Crh l ) r d G. WRIT APPEAL UNDER SECTION 211) CHHATIISGARt! HIGH COURT (APPEAL TO DlVl$ION BENCH) A$T, 206$ Present : Shn Bharat Lal Dembra learned counse! far the appellants Shn N K Agrawal learned Deputy Advocate General for the State/respondents No 1 to 5 Shri S.K. Beriwal, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.9. ORDER (30m September, 2008 ) The foilowing order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. : Learned counsel for the parties are heard on admission. 2. Appellants have tiled-this writ appeal againstthe order dated 22.09.2008 passed in WP. (S) No.5260/2008. >3. “10.1 That the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records from the respondents 10.2 That the Hon bie Court may kindly be pteased to Issue a writ of oertloran quashlng order dated 10/09/2008 issued by the respondent No. 3 as per Annexure PI1. 10.3 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased'to direct the respondent No. 2 to pay the difference amount of salary and other arrears and monitory benefits as per order dated 10/05/1 999 vide Annexure PI4. 10.4 That, pending consideration of this petition, the petitionersmay kindly be allowed to work at present place of posting‘in State of Chhattisgarh. 10.5 Any other reliefs, which may be deemed fit and proper'in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be allowed. The appellants tiledthe writ petition for'the following reliefs:— 3. The etitioners thus, in sustance were seeking quashing of p b the order dated 0.09.2008 whereby the petitioners were relieved 1 or their joining in the State of Madhya adeh. In addition to the f Prs bove relief, the etitioners were also seeking a irection t a p d o espondent No. to pay the difference amount of eaery; arrears; r 2 t and other moitory benefits as per the order dated 10.51999. n 4. The etitioners were finally allocated to the $tate of adha p My v or ti mi Pradesh ide der dated 31 3.2001. The petioners adttedly did not chalienge their allocation to the State of Madhya Pradesh vide order dated 31 03.2001 at any stage and not even in the writ petition. The order impugned in the writ petition dated 10092008 relieving the petitioners from the State of Chhattisgarh for their joining in the State of Madhya Pradesh is only a consequential order based upon the order dated 31 03.2001. 5i We, therefore; do not find any infirmity in the impugned order dated 22.09.2008 whereby the learned Single Judge has declined to interfere in the matter. 6. So far as the petitioners’ prayer for payment of difference amodnt of salary; arrears and other monitory benefits as per order dated 10.5.1999 is concerned, appellants/petitioners shall be at liberty to make a representation to respondents No. 1 to 5 in that ’ behalf. 7. With the above observation, the writ appeal stands disposed \ i of. i//K// l Sd/— Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge Chief mice Judge