2-E7Z3-7 /-- |g|F !1F?ACS IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.ISlNo. 4^0^/2010 PETITIONERS f\ ^>y> , «•° ..•'^ '^y •^'A" / ^''/~. / "<'^°^'" ,'.<'••' RESPONDENTS 1. Mahendra Kumar Yadav, S/o. Shri Shivlal Yadav, aged 49 years, Occupation- Sendce, Presently posted as Asstt. Grade- III in the office of Superintending Engineer, PMGSY, Raigarh, District- Raigarh (C.G.) /^2. Kanhaiyalal Verma, S/o. Shri Dhananath Verma, aged about 56 years, Occupation- Service, Presently posted as Tiine Keeper, R.E.S. Sub Division, Basna, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Department of Panchayat and Ri-tral Development, Mantranalaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) /2. Development Coniinissioner, Panchayat and Rural Development Department Raipur (C.G.) y3. Commissioner, Bilaspur Division, District- BUaspur (C.G.) / 4. Block Development Officer, Sarangarh, District - Raigarh (C.G.) iii witIT PETITION UNDER ARTBCLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA _jtL Bl^a ysse^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0.6609 OF 2010 PETITIONERS Mahendra Kumar Yadav RESPONDENTS Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others Gowri (Writ Petition underArticle 226/227 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri I.S. Sahu, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Y.S. Thakur, Dy. Adv. General forthe State. ORDER(ORAL) (Passed on this 21st day of January, 2011) 1. hleard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioners impugn the orders dated 6-3-1998 & 20-7-1998 whereunder grant of regular pay scale to the petitioners has been withdrawn. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the case of the petitioners is squarely covered by the decision of this Court passed on 27-2-2007 in W.P. (S) No.1861 of 2005 (Ram Dulare Prajapati & Others v. State ofMadhya Pradesh & Others) and other connected matters. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners have already made representations along with the copy l of the order passed by this Court before the respondent authorities, but till date the same has not been considered and decided. 4. At this juncture, learned counsei appearing for the State submits that the representation pending before the respondent authorities shall be considered and decided within the stipulated period. 5. Accordingly, it is directed that the concerned authority shall take steps to decide the representation of the petitioners in the light of the decision of this Court, on its own merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date Qf receipt of a copy of this order. 6. With the aforesaid pbservations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge