r^. ^-^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SinaleBench : Hon'bte Shri H.L. Dattu. C.J. Petitioner Writ Petition No.2974 of 2003 Smt. Sadhna Aklesh Shrivastava, aged about 38 years, W/o Aktesh Shrivastava, R/o Shri A.K.Shrivastava, Sub-Engineer, P.W.D., Bhatapara, Distt. Raipur(C.G.) Respondents W^IH^ 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Women & Child Development Ministry, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) District Project Officer, Women and Child Development, Raipur (C.G.) Project Officer, Unified Child Development Project, Kasdol, Distt. Rajpur (C.G.) The Coliector, District Women and Chiid Development Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) The Commissioner, Department of Women & Child Development, Ralpur (C.G.) Present : Shri P.K.Patel, counsel for the petitioner. ShriSanjay S. Agrawat, Government Advooate for the State. ORALORDER (Passed on 21st March, 2007) According to the petitioner, she was appointed as Sypervisor fn the office of Women and Child Deveiopment Project at Pushprajgarh, District Shahdol on 19-6-1987. At present, she is working in the office of the Chiid Development Project, Bhatapara, District Raipur. The grievance made out in this writ petition filed by her under Articles 226/227 ofthe Constitution of India is that she has completed her period of probation of two yeare, but the respondents have not regularized her services and they have still oontinued her on probation, without issuing any order to that effect. Further, the pay of the petitioner has not been fixed by the respondents and they have also deprived the petitioner from her salary payable from December, 1993 to August, 1994. r' WuUs (2) The petitioner in this writ petition has stated that before approaching this Court, she had already filed representations dated 11-9-1998, 27-1-1997 and 4-9-2002 before the respondents and those representations have not been considered bythe respondents in spite of long lapse oftime. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court seekjng an appropriate direction to the respondents. (3) In my opinion, the responsible respondents ought to have consldered the grievances of the petitioner made out in her representations. Since that has not been done, a direction requires to be issued to the respondents. (4) Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. A direction is issued to the competent authorities, before whom the representations said to have been filed by the petitioner are pending, to consider the same and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law, within a reasonabte time. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- Chief Justice luww^.