IN THS HIGH COURT OF JUDICA1URB, AT-BILASPUR (C.G») BEIWEEN _ _^f>^0. 390/.5»3 d PETITIONER ....^^? "^gi.^:::^.. ^^.'^v {:^^^?^^ ^ ^s^ RESPONDENTS M^NOHAR RAM PR^DHAN AGE-56 YEARS SON OP SHRI D»P.PR^HAN POSTED AS CO-OPERATIVE INSPECTCR AT - OFFICE OF REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES^ RAIPUR B/0 SECTOR N0»2^ BLOCK N0» - 5 ROOM N0»-21, KASHI RAM NAGAR RAIPUR TAHSIL & DISTT» RAIPUR (C.G.) VERSUS 8^1. ./C2 ......^L_:. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH THBDUGH - THE SECRETARY CO-OPERATIVE DEPAR'mENT* D.K.S- BHAWAN^ RAIPUR- THE REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES^ AGRICULTURE UNIVEi^Ty CAMPUS^ LABHANDI, RAIPUR CHHATTISGARH. ^RIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE-226 OP^pNSTIIUTION OF INDIA. B XI-HC-22 ^8*1<?TT^W^ 3^T ^l^Krt^, ^rftWR', f^TRTy 3TT^?T .b ^: 200 3<(^l Ma|^» ^...-.>.?.3.1?./.^... ^ 3TI^T^T f^TWW^T ^TT^^cf. tiN^^-^ 3T^T^<rr^:^fN 27,4,2005 AAr. R.K. Keshorwani, counsei Mr- 6.K. 8eriw<s!, Dy. Advoca^ The peti+ioiier has preferre^ dated 26.9.1999 (Annexure P-1) pos^ Sod€ti@^,M.P« whereby ths cnquiry ond a pendty has been imp^ the effect that the petitioner i| Co-operative In^pector. Coun^ei for the petitioner <sppe<2i hos been pr^ferred by the Co-operative Department, Stote oppeol has not been decjded, ther^l petjtion. He further submit^ th^t ^ DepQrtment, State of C.6 is ^Qyingl i^ not wailQbIe with hlm, wherea^,- State of M.P. vide ietter datecj communicated to re^ponctent No.l the State of Chh<stti^9arh. Coun^l left in the retirement of the pctiti^ to po^t but no relief ig bejn9 gfc petitioner submits that respondei^t within one month a decidle his dpp^al cbi^^41-i ^H<nT^te^t'<f^^d< ^3Tf^R'3TI^r dt i jfor the petstioner. \c fieneraf for th^ respond&nts. thi^ wrjt petition being Q9gr?€V€dby order- 3ed bythe Additional RegistrQr-.Co-operGtivc petstio^er hos been held quilty in the departmentd <mpo|sed under Ruie 10 (6) of C.CA. Ruies, 1996 to reverted to the minimum poy scaie of tubmits that aQainst the aforesaid order an ^etitioner' before the S@cr^t<3irly of erstwhije M.P in the year 1999, but tiii d<2te thot ^for^r perforce the petitioner ha^ fijed thl^ |ow re,3pondent No.l-Secr&tary, Co-operatlye |that fiie pertaining to case of the p€t?tlor<er the Secrstary, Co-operatsve Departnient, 29.5.2CK)3 (Annexure P-16) has aiready t-hat whole record ha^ olready been ^ent to al^o submlt^ that only nine month^ time i^ ?ner and the petitioner is running from piiiar •anted to him. TTierefore/counsei for the No.l be directed to get the file traced ond in ca^e the fiJe i^ not traced out then th^ p&titjon^^ mdy b^ ajjoweci to ^ubmit the paper^ already avai^^^h him XI-HC-22 3^T ^I^Krt^, ^Tfl^4l(o, fc|diy^< M5|<^ HI^^T^W^ 3Tli^ ..^2?.0/^. y\ ^ 200 f^5^ W^T^T f^ri^3T1^T ^tTW^1:?cf •T 3TI^T?^TTW^fN' befor^ r^gpondent No.l ond in turn the appeai based on those papers an^ 7he prayer mode by counse fdr, a^ the petitioner b on the ver< appeQi js not being decided. Every ecrser expect^ that he should r^tir^ therefore, it is the duty of the de| pending cases are di^po^ed of with In the circym^tance^, re^por within Q perlod of one month from giving °pportunity to the pstitionsr one month/ as vsry iimited time is case, the app©QJjs not traced out t| to fi!e the nece^^ary document^ Gir| the appeGl within 15 day^ after expi the flls ba^ed on the poperg ^ubmit^ of the Co-operative Department w| one month & fifteen day^ from petitioner and the department deci^ As mentioned earJier that v^ the pstltioner, therefors, r€^pond| the petitioner within the time schec|i With the direction Qfore.<ddl CM^[d41vi ^i^^iT^te^^i^n: ^3Tf^q"3TT^T ^@5poncl®ntNo.i be dir^cted to reconssti+ut^ decide the ^ame. for the petlttoner appeGrs to b& just Qnd |e of retiremcnt Qnd ^ince la^t ^ix ycar^ hb Igovcrnment employee at the fag end of his peacsfuliy wsthout any stsgynes on his career, ifcartment thot before his retirement ali the thatever resuit |dent No.l is dirccted to g@t thc file tr^ced, I'oday and if fiie Is trQced in that case ofter of h@Qrsn9 decsde the app@Qi wsthjn another jeft in the retirement of the petitioner. In ?en respondent No-1 will QJJOW the petitioner ^ady waSiabie ^ith him for reconstitution of j^y of one month from today and reconstitute ^ed by the petltlonsr snd cSso by the officers |thin another one month i.e< after expiry of todciy csnd thercafter, ofter heQring the |e the appeai within another two moriths. ^ry iimited time is left in the retirement of ^nt No.l l^ dlrec+ed to dedde th@ csppeaJ of ule 9iven in the above order. the petltion ^tand^ dl^po^ed of, w ^^ ^y XI-HC-22 ^?r,cF)T f^TWW^T $h^icb^rfecT /SLss^l^-4< 3^T ^l^lcrt^, ^Tfi^41(o, ?®f<rtl<Hy HW^IT^HT^ 311^1 M5(W ^.^f.M../.^ ^ 200 f6 3T[^T^<TTW^Tf5cT -^>, However, if th@ petitioner| respondent No.l-Secretar^ or this] No.l-SecretQry, In thQT case the pet law as i^ wdSQbje to him. Certified copy as per ruies. cbi^f^i41vi ^i^^iT^:tel:^'<f^^<ii< ^^Tf^TW^T i^ not ^ati^fi^d with the decs^ion of order ss not compjied with by respondent tioner wM be at ilberty to tokc recoorse of Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge