HISH COURT OFJUDIGATURE AT BILASPUR: CHHAmSGARH SingleBench: Hon'bleShri H.L. Dattu, CJ. Writ PetiUon No, 2530 OF 2004 Petitloner Dr, Sudha Pandey, W/o. Late Dr. V.K Pandey, Aged.about 59 yeare, R/o. MIG 18, Nehru Nagar, Bilaspur (C. G. ) V8. Respondents 1. : StateofGhhattis§arft,thFoyghits Secretary, DepartmentofPyblieHealth and famiiy welfare, D.K.S. Bi-iawan, : Raipur, Raipur(C.G.) 2. StateofMadhyaPradesh.Throughjts Seorefary, Department of Public Mealth & FamilyWelfare, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopa!- /(M.P.) , J ! • S. The Director, Public Health & Famiiy Welfare Department, Bhopal-.(C,G.) : 4. TheChtefMedioalOfficer/CivilSyrgeon,. , JabalpL(F(BI.R,) : . 5. Dy. Oireoicir, Public Health & ;Farniiy . :; i Weltere Department, SEONi (M.P.) , Present: SWiP.K.Bhaduri.counselforthepetitioner. OBALORDER . , . (Passed^n 22'" nflareh.ZOO?) The petitioner Dr. Sudha Pandey isthe wife of originai petitionsr Dr. V.K.Pandey, who died during the pendency of thjs writ petition. Bylorcter dated 12-7-2006; the present petitioner who is the l^al representativepf]t(ie deceased petitioner, has been brought ori record. -Ttite deceased;petitjqrteF Dr. V.K.Pandey was a Govemment Servant. He worked as a JDocteii- clifferent places. , It appears that he|tendered Ns ;resignation somgtime:!in]tif]e -month of Nbvember, 1973. After|]apse;cjf:amQnth,lhewent!t:i0f'oi|e authorities, requesting them to perr^it him fo;;witBdraw| t-ti's Fesignation his case thaf'lBr.the\,firstrtiine'|iQn^16;gsi3,9gS| communicated^o!the;petitiOraertl-^W^ti^|^e§j^ci| fesigria|JE?pg frje^.'F'espofigenjisl'tf .:^jc»^fel m in ttite ffil •2- I ^ P) Aggrieved by the orcler so passed by the respondents on 16.6.1988, the deceased petitioner Dr. V.K.Pandey had approaohed the State Administrative Tribunal by filing an application O.A, No.456/88. The Tribuna! has disposed of theapplication by its order dated 27.04.98. Irithat, the Tribunal has observed as under: "Therefore, since due to absolute inaction letbargy or may even be incompetence of the then ofFiciais of the department conoerned the acceptanoeofresignation ofthe petitioner coufd not be communicated to the petitionerprior to issuance of letterdated 16,6.1988 and pripr to it the petitioner had withdrawn the said resignation tendered by tiim on 12.12.7a through notice dated 12.7.87. iThe said resjgnation could not have been accepted as on account of . withdraw [ of the said resignation there had remained . nothingfo beaccepted. Nevertheless, sinoe the petitjoner had remained absent from hisdutiesfor aboutnfteen yeare he can not be permitted to join his duties unless he applies for leave for*the said period of about 15 years or more being graiitedto him and the said leave, if at all, is granted , to him^by His Excellency the Governor of Madhya 1 ; Pradeshi': • N (3) Inthis petition filed ynder Artioles 226/227 ofthe Constitution oflndia, theonlyreliefthat is sought for isasunder: "Respondents be direofed to pay the petitionerthe due arreare of sataryand other consequentia! benefits from 1st August 11972 till his date ofi retirement.° (4$ One of the principlesjfor issuing a writ ofmandamus isthatj the petitioner befbre approaching this Court, should approach | tl|4; respondsnts by making an appropriate application/represenSation and^lf ^)i|| any reason, that application/repr^sentation; is rrot; ponsidered rb^t't^lj; respondents within a reasonal:ile,i,tjrne,,shej may lapiproach this"CGiurtii'ft>n! appropriat&relief.^- : ; •••P':.''' ;F!a ] ;a!i i; ..^•i; iil1'!! S''ih^ l,is! 1;i::t' •:i: !; .'.' : i' (5) In the instant case, before approaehing this Court forthe relief sought in this petition, the petitioner at no ppirit bf time had approached the respondents for grant of the aforesaid relief. Therefore, in my opinion, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is wholly premature. Accordingly, 1 decline toenfertain this writ petition. However, l grant liberty totl-ie petitioner, ifshe so desires, to go, before the appropFiate authoritiSs for appropriate reiisf. Ordered acoordingly. i _ Sd/- ChiefJustice