^ T ^ 't^ ^- [y^ IN THE HIGH CQURTOF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARH) ^^ W.P,IS)J^o^ /2010 PETITIONER /^ ^ ,,.^¥^^° ^.^'•-:'::. -- x^\^^'" ^^^ ^^ RESPONDENTS ^""'^, 7 ^.^' ll^r^^f^j '^T^ ^ Maniram Som, S/o. Shri Aghanuram Som, , aged about 58 years, R/o. Village- Mode Tahsil - Nagri, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) VERS US ^" (1) State of Chhattisgarh through its Secretary, Department of Forest, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) ^ (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.) 4 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^^K^? ^ -,HC-22 ^"5? ^|<41<r14, ^Tli<i^l<o, f^<VIS^ll< 3T?iw T?^^ W^TT^^^*'*0'**^ <?Ft 20° •fN^sr' STT^T'^T Rrii?h STI^I 5^<-iict) ^f^a ''> B.B.: HOM*BLE JUSTSCE MR. PRI'tflNKBR DIWAKBR 16--12-2010: Shri S.P.Kalje, counsel for the Shri S'mita Ghai, P.L. for the Grievaace of the petitiois.er iu tiiough .he is en.titied for his regrjlai Guard, he has been regul.ari.zed. o?i. Shri Kale submits fhat fb..e such regularization order on the po remR'his tliat the regiilajization ord.€ petitioner. >tate. th.e present petitbn is that ^zation on llxe post of F'orest |h.e post ofwa.tehraian. )etitioB.er has D.ot illed any ^t of Watch.m.aii. biit the fact ^r has alrea.dy 'been. passed. Counsel for the petitioner jhave conipleted aU the foroiaUties fc |favour of the petitioner aod tlierefoi iniay be peniiitted to witlidraw the jto file a'fresh. represeiitatioii. befoi jsaaie nxay be directed to be decidei jexpeditiously as possible. Counsel for flie State submi jthe fact he cannot Eaake any st jGovemnient is willing to regulaiize jou the post of Forest Giiard or ^bjection rf the petitioner inakes jauthority concenied aa-d the s^ laccordauce with law. S'lilbHlS.tS chl^td41v1 'RTR^f ^ ft^t <p3i<^i< ^7 ^rf^PT 371^T th.at tlie respondents r passijig necessar}r oxxler m. a.t this sta.ge tiie peti.tioii.er present .peution witli liberty respondent No.2 aod the ia accord.ao.ee w:itSi law as that without ascertain:m.g ttement whether the State •ii.e ser^ices of tlie petitioner not, However, he has no representation before fhe iine is decided by it iri 5t- ^ [Tft^ '^'4 ^^ ^i^iid^i, ^Ti1^^<?, l^ray 3ff^T X[^^ ^i^dl ^^l^""*-—***'—*--*"'**'**-**-^^ 200 "i^^?' 3^T^T r^i°h ^^ 5^^ich -^^ h^*^ s W^T'^TT^ ^rfin Accordiiigly, fhe petition is fhat iii the event of siiy represeu^ before respondeut No,2 raisiag expected to be decided by it^ a.ccordao.ce with law as expeditious| |lisposed of wifli a dir'ection |ation .filed by tlie petitioner 4is grievauces^ the saine is aufhori.tv concem.ed iu |y as possible, It is made clear that this opinion on nierits of fhe case would be at liberty to decide the stri.ctiy m. accord.aa.ee witii. law afte^ position and the statenient niade atj Qourt ajlid •lias •not expressed aiiy the authority' concenied re|)resentation, of-tJie petitioner veriiying the coiTect. factu.al the bar. -.-—.-.-.--.---——- chl^Id^l'1 ^I^^T "9'ftc?t <f^-(r$l< '^^rf^FT^n^T Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge r~- [^ '^^r