CW” ‘ 2. IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition No. ilwé (2003 PETITIONER :/ C.B. Pradhan, aged 49 Years, S/ o Late Balmukund Pradhan Sub-Inspector, Benure, Tahsil Narayanpur, Police District Narayanpur (C.G.) VERSUS :1.\/fhe State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department of Home D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) tx- Director General of Police ' Police Head Quarter Raipur (C.G.) RESPONDENTS 3 . Inspector—General of Police Bastar, District Bastar (C.G.) uperintendent of Police Bastar, District Bastar (C.G.) RIT PETITION UIA 226(227 OF THE CONSTITU- \ IN TION THE OF NATURE INDIA FOR OF MANDAMUSICERTIORARI ISSUE OF AN APPROPRIATE ETC. WRIT OR c 1 ‘ ' ‘1 ‘ DIRECTION l ORDER IN THE LIKE NATURE ETC. i l. PARTICULARS N OF THE PETITIONER As stated above in the cause title. atiwmsL-Aatr < a S “W The petitioner’s case is Police Department of State of While his posting as Sub—I Narayanpur he discharged his honesty and during that period @ Sukhdeo @ Sukanna. On account of killing of said naxalite, as per the for out of turn promotion and accordingly, a by the Superintendent of Police, Bastar. On )moted seven inspectors and constables but onsidered by the respondents Similar order 4 on 1,7.2004 but again the petitioner was that he is working as Sub~1nspector in the CG. F‘ulther' case of the petitioner is that aspector, Police Station Benure, District duties efficiently With utmost devotion and he kilied one naxalite namely Vijay Bhaskar policy, the petitioner is entitled proposal for the same was sent 13.5.2003 respondent No.2 pri ‘the petitioner’s case was not c was passed by respondent No not considered forpromotion. Learned counsel for th< allowed to make a represen grievances and respondent No. which learned counsel for the 1 'espondent has no objection. Having heard learned :ounsel for the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances oi the case, the petitioner is allowed to make a representation to respondent No.2 within two weeks from today raising all his grievances and in turn i petitioner submits that petitioner may be. tation to respondent No.1 raising all his 1 be directed to decide his representation, to respondent No.2 is directed to decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law within another three months from the date of receipt of representation after considering all the points raised by the petitioner. With the direction aforesaid, this petition stands disposed of. Sdl— ‘a L.c.BHAD00 Judge Certified copy as per ru s. XI-HC—22 3aW, We,W ‘ m ‘ mmw.e.2.§2§/% 1H 200 ................ . . ............ . .W ............................. warm mm meninges minim rrmeh't tsQ‘Tthan melee %aii%qan%¥r 11.4.2005 l Shri L.C. Das, counsel fcr the petitioner.’ Shri Bhaskar Pyasi, Pan 31 Lawyer for the State,