0%‘J07/~ ging§§ 5gn¢h BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITIONJS) N0. 45322 OF 201 1 K PETITIONER : BRIJMOHAN RAM , S/ o Shri Parmeshwar Ram, aged about 59 years, Working in the post 0f adhoc Tracer, in the office of P.M.G.S.Y‘, Project Implementation Unit No.2, Ambikapur, DiStt. Surguja (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh, Through— Secretary, Water Resources Department, Raipur (C.G.) 2v Engineer in Chief, Water Resources Department, Sihava Bhawan Raipur (C.G.). (Bu/Chief Engineen Hasdeo Kachar, Resources Department, Water . Bilaspur(C.G.) u/ 4. Executive Engineer and member secretary, P.M.G.S,Y., Implementation Unit No.2, Ambikapur , Distt. Surguja (C.G.) Project y WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONERz- As given’a‘bove in the cause title of the petition HEGH QGURT ®F CHEATTESGARH AT EELASPUR SB : EION’BLE SHRI JUS’PICE PRITIDIKER DIWAKER mp4s; we. 432g 201 1 WRIT PETITxcN KINDER Aggcm 226/22”? OF wHE ggmggnmmm m: INDEA Agpeamnce: Shri Ashok SWaJilkar, counsel for ihe petitioner. Shri Pravcen Das, Dy. GA. for ths Siam. GRAL ORDER (05.08.2011; Gn‘evance. of the patitiona in tha grasent petitim}. £3 that miu'aBy he waé appointed as Tracsr on adhoc basis in The inigation artment on 5.7.1980 but since then he is working on mt: saié, post Whereag he is an’u‘tled for hiS reguim’gtion and to gat thé: benefit of the regular post. of tracer. 1t has been further goimie& out. 1311f, to tho oarlicr wn’t patition mod, by the petiiiomir he, had matie roprosontation to tho rasp, No.3 but the same has not been dedéed by the eaid‘ author-rig? on The ground that he is not competen representation could be decided b submits that gmrsuarlt to the letter Counsel for the petiiioner dap by tho counsel for the petifioner that @1181 t to decide the earne age The y the resp. No.2 Le. Engineer in Chief. dated 4.1.2011 (Amexure ?/ 19) he haS Wher made repxeeentation {Annexure P] 20} to resp. No.2 on 12.1.2011 but till date the same has not been decideci and the petitioner is due to retire on 3 1.8.201 1. The Emited prayer of the petitioner i3 tha‘t (iixection may be iseued to yesp. N0.é to decide the yendireg representation of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible. i State counsel has no objection if the representation of the petitioner is decided in accordance with law. \. gmwmNERg Blijmohan 12am Versus RESPONDENw Stake 9f 0G. ex, Others 6% Let the: petitiontr make a frssh representation to tha msp. No.2 along with the copy of this order and in turn the. same wcmld be decided by the: authority concerned in accomémce with law. Accordingly, the petitiou 1's disyosed of with a direction to the petitioner to make fresh representation Within a week from today and in tum it is expected from the resp. N02 to decide the same as expeditiously as possible preferably within two months fromthe date of receipt of copy of this order. it is made dear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and the authon'tv concerned would be at liberty to decide the appeal of the/petitioner. in accordancedW/ /,/