s.'. .•: ':^,/cs^ ^.^&i;^i; IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARILAT BILASPUR W.P.(S)NO. I^\^ /2009 ^-y ,A N' RESPONDENTS 1 PETITIONER Ramakant Swarnkar S/o Shri Tulsi Ram Swamkar, aged about - 59 years, Garden Superintendent, Govt. Gardeh Sarkand, BUaspur (C.G.) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Secretaiy, Deptt. of Agriculture, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Director, Horticulture & Forestry, Raipur(C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTIQN QF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRm T®E^NATURBQF MANUAMUS. PROHIBITION. eERTIORARI ETC._OR ANY OTHER DIRECTION OR ORDER TO DO JUSTICE IN THE MATTER ^m^^^^ W.P.lSl^Q, 1719/2009 Ramakaat Swamkar State of C.G. & Another PETITION UNDBR ARTICLB 228. OF THB CONSTITUT!ON QF INDIA Shri Suiul Otwani, couiisel for the petitioner. Shri Yashwant Singh Thakur, Dy. Advocate General with Shri Arviad Dubey, Paael Lawyer for respondents No. l & 2. t»us .Awyg Sliri Suiul Otwani, leamed counsel for fhe petiuoner subniits fhat fhe only reUefwhicb fh.e petitioner is claiBiiug in. fhis petition is to couduct D.P.C. for promotion to fh.e post of Assistant Director froiu that of Seuior Development Officer. Contention of the petitioner is ftiat though he was eUgible for his promotion. about 7 years back but as D.P.C. has not been convened by tlie State Goventment, petitioner could n.0t get his promotion to the higher post. Leamed counsel for the State submits that fhe •respondents are ready to consider the case of the petitioner along witfa otlier suitable candidates for proinotion aiid the niatter has ah-eadv' been forwarded to tlie Public Sennce ^. Conuiussion for its approval on 25-06-2009 vide Aiinexure R/2. However no coranranication has yet been received from fhe PSC. /^s^^ •2,' .Con.tention of Shri Otwani, leamed couusel for tbe petitiener is that ttie petitioner is retirmg ou 31-08-2009 aad ifthe D.P.C. is held befoie that he m.ay get a chance for consideratioa for the hj^her post, for- which-he becam.e eHgible seven years back. He subinits tbat he cau only be proin.oted if be wiU fulffll alt ttie norm.s ofthe DPC. Consideriug tlie facts and circum.staiices of the case aad limited prayer of the petitioaer, it is expected fi-oin the respondents to constitute a DepaTtaiental . Pi~oiaotion Coininitt.ee aud hold a ineetin.g as expeditiously a? possible preferably wifhin a period ofone inonfh froin the date of receipt of fhe copy of fhis order. ?4>n"h<- .^^3;.: With fhe above observation tlie petition is disposed of. Sd/- PntinkerDiwakar Judge / Mlil'lt