BEFORE THE HON'BLE, HIGH COURT JUDICATURE, BILASPUR(C.G.) W.P. N0. ....../..r.'?:.Z... OF 2003 ^ IN THE MATTER OF M.P. GARG AGE 54 YEARS SON OF LATE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD GARG, :ASSISTANT DIRECTOR-HORTICULTURE, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF DHAWANI STREET N0. 4, P.0. JAWAHAR NAGAR, DISTRICT SATANA (M.P.), AT PRESENT OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR HORTICULTURE, THAKUR PARA, NEAR MAHARANA PARK, KAWARDHA (C.G.) V ERS U S 1. UNIONOFINDIA THROUGH SECRETARY-DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCE AND PENSION, KHANMARKET NEW DELHI ^ PETITIONER ^ II 2. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH, ^ ^^ c^<d<^ ^uy/ THROUGH SECRETARY, (AGRICULTURE) y.^-^^y^Q ^•fRALAYA, BH0PAL (M.P.) VALLABH BHAWAN, ^ 3. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH, THROUGH SECRETARY, (AGRICULTURE) , MANTRALAYA, D.K.S. BHAWAN, G.E. ^ ROAD, RAIPUR_(C.G.) _, . ,. ^v t.^'s^''^'^^^1^ Lcu f^^^^ ^c^A^ ^.v^ 6kQ^ t^Tf V^J RESPONDENTS ^< ^cJ^o:^-&^v<L^ PETITION UNDER ARTICLE226/ 227 OF THE ^^•y CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS. CERTIORARI AND ANY OTHER ORDER OR DIRECTION AS DEEMED FIT _^-^.-.-...- HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Sin^le Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri. Wnt Petition No. 1787 of 2003 Petitioner M. P, Garg Versus Respondents Union of India & ofhers Shri M. K, Bhaduri, Advocate for ttie petitiouer. Shri S. K. Beriwal, Staading counsel for Respondent No. 1. Shri Sachiii Singh Rajput for Respondeuts No, 2 aad 4, Shri Paiikaj Shrivastava, Paael lawyer for rcspoudent No. 3. ORAL ORDER (6th Febmaiy, 2006} The foUo^viag order of the Court was passed by Satish K. Agnihotri, J. 1. L^sjned connsel appeadng for fhe petitioner submits that fhe petitioner, who is working on the post of Assistaat Director - Horticiilture in fhe Agriculture Department, is a pennanent resident of Distdct- Sataa m the State of Madhya Pradesh, The petitioner has been allocated to fhe State of Chhattisgarh and he wants his reaUocation to fhe State of Madhya Pradesh, Leamed cozinsel for fhe petitioner, on instractiou, siibniite that the petitioner be granted liberty to inake a representation to the respoiidents for redressal of his grievances. Learaed coiinsel appeajrmg for fhe respondents have no objection to fhe said siibmission. 2- In view ofthe foregoing, the petition staads disposed offinaUy, with liberty to the petitioner to niake an appropriate representation to the respondents/aufhorities conceraied, wifhia a period of two weeks from today, aad fhe respondents/azifhorities are directed to consider and decide the sarae, ia aa objective niaaner, in accordaiice wifh law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the represeiitation, if any, Certr&ed copy, as per Rules. §^/_ Satish K. Agnihotri Thakur Jud8e