"SINOLE 1^> c^i^^ BEFORETHEHON'BLEHteMCQURtOF CHHATTISGARH . AT.BIl.ASPUR 1 WRITPETITIPN(S»)NQ. ^OQ^ 72009. PETTnONER y.^^^ ,^^ y" VERSUS R£S|!OMDENTS ^. ^ 4. C. R. Sahu S/o. Late Shri Ram Bagas Sahu, aged about- 55 years, Qccupation- Fertilizer In-charge, C.G. State Co-operative Marketing Federation l.1:d., Ramsagarpara, F^aipur, Districl Raipur(C.G.) Chhattisgarti State Co-operative IVIarketing F:ederation Ltd. Through: ~ Secretary, Chhattisgarh State Co operative Marketing Federatjon l.1:d., Civil Lines, Head Quarter, F?aipiii (C.G.) Registrar, Chhattisgarh State Co- operatjve Maik€?ting Federation Ltd. Civil IJnes, Head Quarter, Raipur (C..G.). Assistant Manager, Chhattisgarh State Co-operative Marketing Federation Ll.d., Civil Lines, 1-tead Quarter, Raipur (C.G.) Shri L. D. [)evras (Retired District Judge), Inquiry Officer, Chhattisgarh State Co-operative Marketing Federation Ltd., Civil Lines, Head Quarter, Raipur (C.G.) VVRIT^ElTrjOhLUNDERARTLCL QFINDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRJT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI,MANDAMUS,ORDERORORDERS,DtRECTION QR DIRECTIOS OR THE LIKE. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRFT PETmON fS) No. 4005 of2009 J: PETITIONER RESPONDENTS C.R.Sahu. VERSUS Chhattisgarh State Co-operative Marketing Federation Ltd. & Others. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE226 OF THE CQN8TITUTION QF INDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Asnihotri* J. Present: Shri Saurabh Daagi, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri B.D.Guro, Ad\7ocate forthe respondents 1 to4. QRDERfORAL) (Passed on 27th day ofOctober, 2009) 1< Leamed counsel appearing for tiie petitioiwr submits tiiat the chai'ge- sheet dated 25 Augiist, 2007 (Annexure P/l) was issued. Thereafter, the Depmlment Promotion Committee held its meeting for co^sideration ofthe petitioner alongwith others for promotion to the next hi^ier po^t on 7 July, 2008. It appears that the case of the petitioner was considered and kept in a sealed cover pending departmental enquiiy. Thereafter, the Departniental Promotion Committee again held tts meeting on 26th June, 2009 and the petitioner was not considered for promotion and other jumor pei'sons have been promoted. Thus, this petition seeking a direction to tlie respondeat auAorities either to pass the order pursuant to the decision taken by the Departmental Promotion Committee in its meeting held on 7 July, 2008 or quash the departmental enquiry as tiie enquiry could not be completed within the reasonable time. Shri Gum, leamed counsel appearixig for the respondents submits that the enquiry is under progress. The same shall be considered at the earliest, preferably within a period offour months. Having regard to the facts situation ofthe case^ when the enquiry wa^ initiated in August, 2007 and the petitioner has been deprived of promotion on account ofthe pendency ofthe departmental enquiry, it is directed that the pending Departmental Enquiiy be completed within a period of six weeks from today- asid thereafter, the effect to the sealed envelope, ifany, may be given. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the petitioii is disposed of Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge Ainit