,^: •ss. .?..«"- ^ess.'1- 6a °-- ^^ •^t^ .^V^ot;.....- «\\^-"" 04 ....% IN THE HIGH COURT QF CHHAmSGARHAT Biy^SPUR W.P.NO. /-? S /2006 Vsnnf PETITIONER VERSUS RESPONDENTS s^ y8^ S.S. Bundela, S/o.Shri Sekria Stngh Bundela, Aged about 48 years, R/o. High School Campus, Baikunthpur, District Koriya (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Rural Industries Department, (Gram. Udyog Vibhag), Sericulture Sector, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) The Director, Rural Industry (Sericulture Sector) Department of Sericulture, Sonakhan Bhawan, Ring Road, Raipur (C.G.) The Joint Director, Rural Industry (Sericulture Sector),Department of Sericiilture, Sonakhan Bhawan, Ring Road, Raipur (C.G.) S.S.Kanwar, Aged about 44 years, S/o. Not known, Assistant Director, Department of Sericulture, R/o. Urdana Naka, District Raigarh (C.G.) R.S.Solanki, Aged about 49 years, S/o. Not known, Assistant Director, Department of Seaculture, R/o. Kanker, District Kanker (C.G^ d 227 'fv> SBS:t£Ea^^^KSc^2e^apT^ -CONCTITUTIQN^FJNDIA S fi ^-f- XI-HC-22 ^^f Ts[pfKpi, ^•dl'y'itc, i^cti'My sntn'sRi r<-ii°ii •sin^i sc4i* 'gfta ._.y.^:^,.;^.Zo^ 311^1'e^lIWBfin 13-1-2006 qirafeiqFT'wraT •?'fsizt tfesR ^TaiRiqan^i Shrl Anand Kumar Tiwari, Adv Shri S.P. Kale, Goyt. Advocate Heard. Learned counsel for the petiticjiner submits that the petitioner was given seniority above the responder^s no. 4 and 5 in the eartier years buf in the gradation list ofthe year ^003, he has beenshown junior to respondents no. 4 and 5. He submit^ that he submitted a representation as per Annexure P-7 and sent rehiinder as per Annexure P-S. He submitted that the representation ha^ been rejected as per annexure P- 11 and the same has been irrtintated as per Annexure P-12.,He submitted that his representation h^s been rejected without assigning any reason. He relied on the decisio|ns in thecase ofC. Navaneeswara Reddv -v- Government of A.P. and cjthers (AIR 1998 SC 939). Para 6 of for the petitioner. fortheState. the judgment is relevant and quoted t^elow:- "6. We find force in the|argument of the learned counsel appearing for the contesting |unofficiat respondents in ail these appeals and without going int^i the correctness or otherwise ofthe reasons given by the Trtbun^ we are satisfied from a careful the Govemm^nt have not ap^lied its mind before rejecting the objections rais<..^ by the cont^sting unofficial respondents. As a matter oi fact, the objections, facts were dealt with by the Gjsvemment in the impugned G.O. by obserying as follow:- "In view of the above^ reason to uphold the| ^ persons and hereby rej^ct them as untenable." for quashing fhe impugned G.O., reading of the impugned G.O. that raising points both on law and on position, Uie Government see no objections raised by the affeeted [^^fe4 T XI-HC-22 -s^ ~iiMid'Li, isTii+i'is, 'f^^irey sn^rqii KfW sii^n **<wgf?n fs^ r -'p lssT t^.p.^p. l3^/°& •OT^I'BWIWHf5B <^Ni^4lri ^m<vff^ 'f^st <M-^[< ^a:lf;BH3T|isT Counsel for the petitioner fur^ier' relied on a decision in the case of Aiit Sinah and others -v- the State of Puriiab and others (AIR 1999 SC 3471). Learned cbunsel for the St^te submitted that the petitioner may be directed tosubmit a detailed i-epres4ntation afresh which shall be considered in accordance with law. Having considered and witho|ut expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, in the opinion of this Court given to the petitioner to make a d before the competent authority of from the date of receipt of the stiil remains, the petitioner and th< remedy available under the law. With the aforesaid observatioit ends of justice wiil be served if a direction is •tailed representation raising his grievances he respondents along with a copy of the petitioh within three weeks from toc|ay, and on such representation being filed, the competent authority of the resp|ondents shall decide the same on its own merits in accordance with law as earjy as possible preferablywithin three months epresentation after hearing the petitioner, respondents no. 4 and 5. Notice of (•(earing be also issued to the resppndents no. 4and 5. The representation be de4>ded by a reasoned order. If any grtevance respondents no. 4 and 5 may avail the s, this petition stands disposed of. M.W.P.No. 132/ also stands cfsposed of. Certified copy as per rutes.- Sdl- Fakhruddin judge [^^feq