\N WW,W;W 311wWm a2“ anéa W25 mmW anésl WWWWMW $3I%qané21 Writ Pet PETITIONER: :ltion (S! No.6459l2008 Kamal Sindhu Patel, S/o Late Ved Prakash Patel, aged about 31 years, R/o 369/7 New Shrishti Blacks, Avanti Vihar, Teli Bandha, Raipur (CG) -Versus- RESPONDENTS: 1 . State of Chhattisgarh through ‘ the Secretary Panchayat U85 Rural Development Depament, D.K.S. Bhawari, Raipur (CG) Secretary, Ge11efal Administration Department Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG) Chief Engineer, Engineering Services, Bhawan, Raipur (CG) Joint Commissioner, Ot‘lice of the Development Commissioner, Raipur (CG) (Writ Petition under Articl 226 of the Constitution of India) Single Bench: Hon’ble Shri 2 1-1 1-2008:- Shri Vinod Deshmukh, Shri Ajay Dwivedi. Dy. ( Heard. Rural Vikas hirendra Mishra, J. counsel for the petitioner. }ovt. Advocate for the State. ,L/ a I E§J m Eqim 1H 200 sneer m (We) K) ML W mni$ m 200 mar w (mam) metmW am mer ma? Wmwma mm§wm . '2, aimanéa Grievance of the petitioner is that he applied for the post of Sub—Engineer in response to the advertisement of Annexure P—l dated 28th May 2008 isued by the oiiiee of Development Commissioner. After selec on process was over: the name of the petitioner finds place at s rial number 15 in the selection list of Annexure P—2. However, th name of the petitioner does not flgure in the appointment orde of Annexure P-4 dated 17.9.2008, whereas the candidates, ose names appeared below in the selection list of Annex e P—2, have been appointed. The petitioner’s representation Annexure P—5) against non—inclusion of his name in the appointm nt order of Annexure P-4 has not been considered and decided. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is not pressing this petition at s stage; however, he may be permitted to file a fresh represen tion before the respondent No.4 for redressal of his grievan es, who may be further directed to consider and decide the re resentation within the specified period. On the other hand. learned counsel for the State submits that in case the petitioner file a fresh representation for redressal ‘ of his gievances before t e respondent No.4 along with copy of this order, the same s be considered and decided by the respondent No.4 within a period of four weeks from theLdate of ‘w receipt of the representati n. ii‘Jr \W h i h WI- mni$ m 200 .M} anéa qaa; (WE) anésT a?! wm am an'ésl Wm? mmm‘#%@w ‘4g F a5 W ma mmw anéal In View of the above epubmission of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the respondent No.4 for redressal of his grievances along with copy of this order. On such representation being made the respondent No.4 shall consider and decide the same, on its own merits, in accordance with law; within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the representation. g Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge Mi xH