c^ Sjil le B IN THE HIGH COJJRT QP CHHATTISGARH, AT •- BILASPUR ^^^^ ^. Writ PetitionfSI No. 57 of 2011 Petitioner Vinod Kuniar Lall, Aged - 62 years, S/o Shri Vipin Lall, Retired - Forest Ranger, at - Indrawati Tiger Reserve, Beejapur, District - West Bastar (Beejapur), R/o 3.1, M. I. O., Tatiband, Raipur, District - Raipur (C. G.) VERSUS Resppn^ents /<.<i^ ^^5'> -<s'~, ..-•'" -..^••' 3. State of Chhattisgarh Through - Its Secreta.ry, Department of Forest, Mantralaya D. K. S. Bhawan, Raipur Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (Territorial), Chhattisgarh, H. Q. - Aranya Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Shri ArunKumar Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division, Beejapur, District—West Bastar (Beejapur), Wrlt Petition under Article_- 226 ofthe Constitution of Lfilia. ,$7 HIGH COURT P?_CHH&msClAKU AT BILASPUR SB : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICXB PRITIKKBR DIWAKER W.P.fSt.NO. 3722/2011 PBTITIOHER Vmod Kumar LaU versus RB8PONDBNTS State of Chhattisgarh Otfaers Shri R.K.Kesarwanl, counsel for tiae petitiouer. Shri Praveen Das, Dy. G.A. for fhe State. WRIT PBTITION UNDER ARTICLB 226 OF THB CXiKSTITUTIQBI OPINOIA ORDER (13.07.2011) ChaUen.ge in fhe present writ petition is to the issuance of fhe chai^e sheetdated 13.9.04, 21.9.04 and 17.5.06. The main ground of fhe petitfoner is fhat hfi has filed writ petition befoTe this Court ia W.P. (S) No. 1468/08 in wtuch direction was issued for condudir^ the departmental enquay withm a period of four inonfhs but till date fhe enquuy has not been completed fherefore the sarne be qiashed. Coiinsel for fhe petitioner fairly submits that as tfae ordcr of fhis Coitrt has not been compUed wifh he has already ffled contempt petition which te pending before fhis Court. He furfher submits ttiat the departmental enqituy is being completed ia a vexy hurried inanner even. without giving sufficient time and related docuaucnts to the petitioner and there is eveiy possibilily that ex-parte ori.er would be passed against liim. He further submits that tiU datc the retiral dues of fhe petitiouer has not been settled and he is getting a very meager amoiiat. Fiuin the perusal of the documents as fited by fhe petitioner it appears that serious chaiges have been levefled against Wm and fhls Court has already directed fhe respondents to conclude fhe enquity expeditiousfy. v 90 Merety on the ground that the ditectiou of flus Court is not compHed with, fhe departmental enquiry cannot be quastaed. The petition has no substance and fhe aame is accordingly, dismissed. Needless to state that in the enqiuiy the departmcnt would act striefly m accordance with law and thc petitioncr would be affordcd eveiy opportunily as required. — Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker /