2 GWV BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE AT ‘ BILASPUR (C.G.) w;P. No. 92(M ..... OF 2003 IN THE MATTER OF RAN BAHADUR SINGH AGE 38 YEARs s0N OF‘SHRI LAXMAN SINGH ASSISTANT VETERINARY FIELD‘ OFFICER OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR VETERINARY HosFITAL & DISPENSARY 'RAGHUNATH NACAR’, TAHSIL WADRAF NAGAR, DISTRICT SARGUJA PERMANENT RESIDENT OF VILLAGE & POST TIKRI, TAHSIL IIIIAJHOLI, DISTRICT SIDHIIMP.) PETITIONER VERSUS ” THROUGH SECRETARY- DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCE AND’PENSION KHAN MARKET NEW DELHI STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH, THROUGH SECRETARY (VETERINARY) MANTRALAYA, VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL (M.P.) STATE OF CHHATTISGARH, THROUGH SECRETARY (VETERINARY) MANTRALAYA, D.K.S. ' HAWAN, G.E. ROAD, RAIPUR (C.G.) ' B TATE RE—ORGANISATION CELL r HROUGH SECRETARY A' LLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL M.P. RES’PONDENTS WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/ 22-7 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN THE V @§’ V, &NATURE nRnFR OF IVIANDAIVIUS‘. OR DIRECTION CERTIORARI AS DEEIVIED AND .ANY FIT OTHER (‘- P , S T VA é HIGH COURT OF CHHA’I‘TISGARH AT BILASPUR Single Bench: Hon’bls Mr, Justice Satish K. Agnihotri. Wlit Petitien No. 2614 of 2003 Petitieners Ran Bahadur Singh Versus Rasyondgnts Union of India £5 others Shn' M. h Bhadu‘ri, AdvocatE for ills peh'tionsr. Shri‘S. K. Beriwal, Standing 601111561 for R&sp0nd€nt N0. 1. 8111i Sachix; Singh Rajput for R€sporldent No. 2 €35 4. Shri Pankaj Shrivastava, Panel lawyer for the raspondsnt No. 3. ORAL ORDER ( 8th Fabruaxy, 2006) Th6 following order of ths Court was passed by Satish Kg Agnahotri, J. 1 Leaxned counscl appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is working as Assistant Veterineuy Field OEmer in Veterinary Department at Reghunath Nagar dispensary, Tahsill- Wadraf Nagar, District- Surguja The petitioner is permaaent resident of village Tikri, Tahsil— Majholi, District Sidhi in th State of Madhya Pradesh, The petitioner has been allocated to the State of Chhattisgarh and he wants his reallocation to the State of Madhya Pradesh, learned counsel for the petitioner, on instruction, submits that the oetitioner be granted hberty to make a representation to the lespondents for redressal of his grievances. Learned coimsel appearing for the respondents have no objection to the said submission. In View of the foregoing, the edition stands disnosed of finally, with liberty to the petitioner to make an approlniate representation to the respondents} authorities concerned, Within a period of two weeks from today, and the respondents] authorities are directed to consider and decide the seine, in an objective manner, in accordance with law, within a period of eight Weeks from the date of receipt of the representation, if any, 0{ Certified copy, as per Rules, Thakur e