•^.^^' C^ Je^7, IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) N0. 3-T2- /2010 PETITIONER (^F •o4^^ ....•;'N>y" / Ashok Kumar Chandel S/o Shri Dusit Ram Chandel, Aged about 50 years, Resident of Radhakishan Ward, Near Sheetala Mandir, Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENT - 1) State of Chhattisgarh Though : The Secretary Department of Forest, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) /2) The Chief Conservator of Forest, State of Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.) /3) The Forest Conservator, Durg Circle Division Durg^ District Durg (C.G.) /4) The S.D.O. (Forest) Forest Division Kawardha District Kabirdham (C.G.) /5) Gokaran Singh Thakur occupation Deputy Forest Ranger, Kawardha Forest Circle, District Kabirdham (C.G.) J ^ / 6) Mohd. Reyaz Khan occupation Deputy • Forest Ranger, Durg Forest Circle, District Durg (C.G.) 7) Harishchandra Ratre occupation Deputy Forest Ranger, Kawardha Forest Circle, District Kabirdham (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA .-^- \3W| ^qiqic)^l, yTcY(^l<i, Rcil^^ ^iHrti ^qr^ •••-^*'- ^•^s:)-•^•^.2/./..°...... 3TT^?TtR^(<^f361^) ^20 OT^^TcpTR^icb ^IT3TT^5T^b^icb Siaiha ?^T^T7^rf^TOT^5T SB: Hon^ble Shri Manindirfa Mohan Slurlvastava, J. 25.01.2010 Shri Bharat Rajput, Shri N. Naha Roy, No. 1 to 4 on advaace cop; This petition has proinotion ofpersons who Learaed counsel fo] record was exceUent, ye1 response as to why he ha? even fhough representatic been disclosed nor his| Learaed counsel for tlie rt be disposed ofwith a dire< Learaed counsel for| In fhis view of fhe it wifti a direction to resp4: respondent No.4 regardin|i aad consider the grievan^ thereon withio. a reasonat fhe date of receipt of copy| Needless to erapha^i stiU subsists, it wiU be ^^oM^^ rexnedv^ available to Tiim utader fhe law, 4?i^I<o<Tlri +ii+i«T^"fe^£l<<R|^I^ ^T3TT^5T ^ounsel for fhe petitioner. panel Lawyer for the State/respondents b^en filed by fhe petitioner aggrieved by |are alleged to be juxiior to the petitioner, fhe petitioner subinits fhat fhough his he has not been coiainunicated any been superceded. He also subniits fhat jjn inade to fhe aufhority, no reason has representation has beeM considered. stitioner submits that this petitton may ^Uon to consider his representation. |the State does not oppose, latter, fhe iastaat petitlon is disposed of tndent No.3 to caU for fhe rcconl, froin g represeiitatfou made by fhe petitteiier of fhe petitioner aad take a decision )le period not exceediag 4 monfhs from loffhis order. |is^ ia case the grievance of fhe petitiotier >pen for i1[iim to take rccourse to such »—»saA""