-HC-22 sn^r^r k-U* SfS^t sti^icfi 'yfga •g-g ^(l^ld^, ^Tllti'lli, (»«yll«1< 31T^?T TR^ 111MI g^Jq^-—•———•—••—————'g^ 200 [ct<)'iiET'"""" SII^T^IWdfCT '.p Si.iresU 45 Distridt ^ Kuinar, S/o. Koinal Siagh, aged about R/o Narve, Post Raya, P.S. Raya, Mathura (UP) ye^rs Versu 1. Union 2. 3. New D| Additi<| Deput} fWrit Petition uunder Artid 15-12-2008:- Mr. Goutam Kehtrapal, Ms. Sharmila Siaghai, /Union oflndia. Heard. The petitioner has filed respondents to reiiistate ttie Hawaldar ia C.R.P.F., has beef dated 15.5.2008 on tbe basf agaiast TiiTn for certain uusconf enN[ci41i *iM<nT "4 t^T^ <^i-^i< ^sTfigiTsn^r (81 No.6960/2008 of India, fhrough Secretaiy, Ministry of Affairs, Central Reserve PoUce Force, ;llii ^nal Director, IB. Lucknow (UP) Inspector Genei-al Central Reserye Police porce, PaUipuram, Keral idaat, 51 BataMan, CRPF, DRP Line Dante-frada, District Daatewada (CG) 5. Inquir^ Officer Shri Vikram Siugh, Assistant Coiam|aiidimt, B.M., 51 Batalian, CRPF, DRP, Line D|antewada, Distdct Dantewada (CG) jle 226 of the Constitution of Indis) 3 *JI» cjounsel for thc petitioner, A|sst. SoUcitor General for fhe resnondent |the instant petition for directiou to tlie petitioner as the petitioner, who was |i termiaated vide order ofAtinexure P-] is of departmental enquiiy condiicted Bluct .i! t f-HC-22 aTKB^I W[^ sn^i ^'qwofeg $ •s-a'^raRR, 's'a^Fis. fani'wy 3TT^?T 'qgsR 'wiwgww"""""""""""""""""""'^ • 200 (°i'b<a" Leamed couiisel for pe1 preferred departniental appes the respondeat No.3 aad faas decidiug the appeal on 14,8 has not decided the appeal petition raay be disposed of w to consider aud decide tlie a period. Ms. Shannila Singha respondents subinitted fttat the petitioner shall be considi within a period of two inonfl copy of ffais order. In view of the above paities, tlie iastant petitioi) respondent No.3 to decide fhi] petitioner agaiast his termia^ the date of receipt/productio4 of copy q'ii*lif<n<ilTi tfFRTt^ tST^t •(^fl-^K ^'•aipOTsn^r ^tioner subnuts the petitioner has already ;P. agauist fhe order of teriiuuation 'befoie. ^lso ffled subsequenfly representation for [2008, however, the AppeUate Aiithority till date. He farther subinits that this |ith a direction to fhe AppeUate AyUiori.ly ^peal of fhe petitioner withiti ar specified learaed counsel appearuig for fhe pie appeal of Anztexure P-9 preferred by •red and decided by the respondent No.3 is froia fhe date of i^ceipt/production of sutoinission of leaxTied coiinsel for fhe is deposed of with direction to the appeal of Annexure P-9 preferred by fbe ition within a period of two months from offhis oider. ^^ [^^4 8M