^^,. .// ^' • ^) efi »»(.I-HC—78 3:II^'qiT'f?;TH; 'im STT^I WTW *tWV\l (h*ll«t> '3^[ '<11<11<'1''4, tSTlly'lla, fs|<»|iy^< ^^...^w..^...^^^ ^ SK^I '(!^T ('^?f3^]EI) WIIW ^fpf 3(1^1 PETITIONER Kaml^sh Kumar Thakur, aged about 35 yeai's) son of Slirl Miillu Slngh Thakm-, prese|itly worldng as Inspector, Distt. Dant^wada (CG) Versus KBSPONDENTS 1. State |of Chhattisgarh, fhrough, fhe Chief Secret^iy, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawaa, Raipiir (CG) 2. State Secretbrv 3. Directit Quart^ 4. Direct< Quai-t^ 5. The Dantd 6. Unlonl Muiis^.'y Khan Writ Petition under Artl India S.B. Hon'ble Shri Dhlrenldra Mishra^ J. 26-09-2008 Shri Ganesh Gupta, Shri P.K. Bhaduri, PI). Shri J.A. Lohani, coii(nsel ^- qit^?l41l tTTR^ff ^f 'f^t -(.i^l^K ^aififiTsn^i J3f Madhya Pradesh fhrough the Chief ^ry, BaUabh Bhawan, Bhopal (M.P.) |)r General of Police, Police Head tr-Raipur {CQ} |)r General of Pollce, Police Head [r- Bhopal (MP) Superintendent of Police Distt. |pada (CG) of India, through the Secretary, of Personnel, Public Grievances, ^Iarket, New Delhi cle 226/227 ofthe Constitution of oiuisel for fhe petitioner. for the respondents No. 1 to 5/State. for the respondent No. 6. '"%. •m-HC—78 sv^ii ^n !<•<]'* w sn^v *»ii+ ^ TST "4i<<ici<i, ®Tily<i(o,fsicii'y^ _____tiu.:f.:..C.S.2......s:.y...l:.<*.. *11*1CTI Sh*11<tl - - sn^i ''ra^ (•^cifg^q) TCIIW^f^ISfI^T By this petition undei) of India^ fhe petitioner 22.3.2001 (Annexure P/1) IEJE of the State of MP, whe|r aUocation of fhe State eiapl^yees the State of CKhattisgarh, Article 226/227 of the Constitution fias impugned the Circular dated Isued by the State Reoi^anization Cell ^reby principles/procedure for final worktng ui the State of M.P. to been notified. hfes Grievance of fhe petiti| for the State of MP andl (Annexure P/3) in this reg not considered. In thesd prayed for setting aside fhij (Annexure P/1) in allocation) •^ From perusal of fhe wi therewith, it is observed dociunent regarding final Chhattisgarh. Challenge is to be followed for aUocationl of MP to State of CG vlde on 22.3.2001, on flie basib Committee, that too, after a| representation of Annexurt CM<i[ci4li ^wv\1 ^ fssil •rf^R^R ^atRn sii^i |oner is fhat he had given his option addressed several representations ,a|rd, however, hls representation were ctrcumstances, fhe petitioner has ^ principles and procedures foUowed of services to the State of MP. ttiat allocation [•it petition or fhe docunients annexed the petitioner has not filed any of his services to the State of ijuade to the principles and procedures of services of the employees of State ijinexure P/1, which were duly notified of decisions of fhe State Advisory lapse of more than seven years. The ^ P/3 is undated and fhere is no Ariini XI-HC—78 isni^Twl^tw •n«IT<ffl^IWqN; f\ 's^s ^ww^, vi-^ww, fsfdiy^ . VJfc'-^ 5-Lf ^<% W*1dT thHieh sn^r'q^? ('^pfg^'?) '^<ITW ^lftff 311^1 J evidence Uiat it was dispati received bv them.. For fhe aforesaid reas been filed after more than cause of action, tf any, ar<| dismissed on the groiind o) and is accordinslv, dism.isse|d jy, cni<i[<n4lTTJ^^ ^f 'f^t •(.f<i<^i< ^sifin aii^i ;hed to the concemed autitiorities or |ons, fhe instant petition, which has Iseven vears from fhe date on which ^se to the petitioner, deserves to be delay, at the admission stage itself Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra \ Judge