ukhharan Slngh’Tha bout 51 ye’ars ingh ' tate of'CVhhattIsgarh; Thro he SeCretar M antralaya,-, fanspor Tt, v hawang’ e 7 tand, Ra‘ipUC.G.).' _, V V / D k a ,: , , S ‘ S g T ,‘ , BRai "' ' D ........ ‘ ‘ ' * S r_( t 038 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH: BILASPUR Single Bench: Hon’ble shri Satish K. Agihotri, J. W. P. No. 1127 OF 2006 Petitioner : Dukhharan Singh ’I‘hakur Versus Respondents State of C.G. and Others i/~ . (m Shn' Plashant Jaiswal, senior counsel with Shri Vinay Paudey, counsel for the petitioner. Shri A.S. Kachhuwaha, Government Advocate for the respondents. ORAL ORDER (25th March, 2006) 1. The petitioner was employed in the Police Department as Constable. By order dated 25.4.2003, the petitioner has been sent on deputation h‘om the Department of Home (Police Line, Durg) to the Department of Transport (R3129). Durg). 2. The petitioner met with a serious accident on 8.8.2003, at Arang Road, Raipur, whereby he sustained fracture in the left lower leg and a rod was inserted in the leg. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is still not in a position to perform physical duty of police constable. 3. The petitioner has nled this petition praying that the respondents he directed to absorb services of the petitioner in the Transport Department as the Transport Department Government of Madhya Pradesh, by order (V9 « dated 23.6.93 (Annexure P-4) had absorbed similarly situated constables who met with serious accident. . Learned counsel at this stage, confines his submission to allow the petitioner to make a representan'on to the authon'ties for sympathetic consideration within a stipulated t‘ime, to which learned counsel for the respondents have no objection. Accordingly, the petitioner is granted permission to hle a representation Within a pen'od of four days, along with a copy of this writ petition. In that event, the respondents are directed to consider and decide representation of the petitioner sympathetically W1th1n a period of four weeks, nom the date of Ieceipt/production, of a copy of this order, as according to the petitioner, the order of reversion of the petitioner’s services from Transport Department to the Police Departinent, has been made eEective w.e.f. 16.5.2006. . In View of foregoing, the petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/— Satish K. Agnihotri Judge .