VJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. "7-6^^ / 2QQ6 PETITIONER [G^'^ ^^^ ....->"^"^-- "^^:^^"" v^^y^'"' RESPONDENTS Deepak Das Vaishnav,/ D/o Late Jankidas Vaishnav, Aged about 40 years, R/o Village Haidalkoda, Thana Gendatola Tehsil & District Rajnandgaon, C.G. Presently working as Godown Chowkidar, World Food Program, Range office Dallirajhara , District Durg, Chhattisgarh VERSUS l.State of Chhattisgarh,/ Through the Secretary, Department of General Administration, D.K.S. Bhawan Mantralaya, •f _»». Raipur, Chhattisgarh ^r.^M iaf' :^(^ &/G.»' .^'~fi "^ <9-<3 2. Chief Conservator of Forest,, Government of Chhattisgarh, !.;&'° G.W^ST'0® jaii Road, Raipur, C.G 3. Additional Chief Conservator of / Forest, (Adm./Non-Gazetted) Raipur, C.G. 4. Conservator of forest, '' Durg Circle, District Durg, C.G. 5. Divisional Forest Officer, / Forest Division, Durg, District Durg, C.G, <&-/ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/ CONSTITUTION OF INDIA OF ^THE ^ HE6H COUftTOF CHHATTES6ARH AT KELASPUR W.P. fel No. 7636 of 2006 Petitroner : Deepak Oas Vaishnav - Versus- Respondents ; State of Chhattisgarh and others Single Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri. Shri Jitendra Supta, Advocate for the Petitioner. Smt. Anju Ahuja, Deputy Sovemment Advocdte for the respondents/State. ORGER (Possed an -this 15"' day of Jomwry, 2007) 1. The main grievence raised by the petitioner in this Writ Petition is that vide order dated 20.2.1995 (P/2) he was appointed on compnssionate ground on the post of Sodown Chowkidar as a temporary employee along with 4 other employees and •thereafter, the services of •those emptoyees hove been regutari2ed. But even after •tfie lapse of 11 yeors and also in ^)ite of the foct that &.F.O. hos alrendy recommended to the Conservator of Forest on 26.10.2004 (P/7) for reyihrization of the services of the petitioner, even then •the respondent No. 2 is not passing any order. 2. Learned counsel for Ihe petitioner aibmitted that •the petitioner hos made several rqiresentations to •the req^ondent No. 2, but no-thing has been heard so far, therefore, he be directed to decide -the representation. to which teamed counsel oppearing for the respondents has no objection. _i- J-w^rfiAUnEttf4ADlE •<• Bablu 3, Havin9 heard leamed counsel for the part'ies, having regard to the facts cnd circumstwices of the case, hwing perused the letter sent by &.F.O. to the Conservator of Forest, ond without expressing wiy opinion on the merit of the case, the petitioner is albwed to make a detailed representation along with copy of •this petition to the reqiondent No. 2 within a period of 10 days ond in tum, the respondent No. 2 is directed to cfecide the reprcssentation of the petitioner within o period of 30 days from the date of receipt of -the representntion, in accordance with faw. 4. Wi'th the direction aforesaid, the petition stands di^iosed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- SatishKAgmhotri Judge ¥-