y ===a I IN T^HIGH COURT OF .mMCATUKE. A^BILASmjRfC.G^ W.P.NO. l lo3 OF 2004 /^ BEETWEEN PETniONER P.LAKARA AGED-43 YEARS, .^/^3N<3FSHRIIT^HLLAKARA ^P^TED AS -SUB ENGINEER, ^* AT- 0/0 JAlsIPAD PANCHAYAT, GURUR, >.i^Se^'.--^@isi^c^D^ . -^^^<- R^^BE^^ ..^^<^ E>HiMT^^^ <?p<^'^"' ^—•—'~—~- ^^.^^^.^ <t'!^ VEgSl^. '• }• .•^^ , .. • ; '•.. ^ ^ ~——~—':'/"^ '.!::. ; ::;; ; • •' •' • :: ' RESPOPfflUENTS : 1; IK^ ( 0^ rEHIE0l3(3H-IW I3^^BiHAWAN,RAIPUR. iw MBIfWliiiTO^AmM. :3vitaii REM!EiaaaWiCHiii!i^^.il^^ |ffilBUafflBM gSiWiSf®!i8fflB^SB^ BBSMSfiKEffl@8^^ il^UU@iBBE8SIWBMWB!aB B[<BgaiiMffiffi5M j®BIWiB^^ ^ HI*N>t%1T^ \diw|»^^tcW,t>Tfl«<lci,Brtl'My>( __ W.'P.?Ap,_;.\Ao^i2^.t ..........................Y........ ^200 ail^fWTR'litb. aW3II^CTdi*(i<b . ^ - ^ "\1;- 3i^wiRi9(^rfg«is) ^triw^fta sn^it Ta^cal provipions 25.07.2005 Shri R.K. Kesharwalul Shri Aldul Agra^E State/respondents. Heard on adxaission. This writ petition has| unpugned oider dated 29.1^. disciplmaiy aufhority has i^ of one aanual uicreinent wf in fhe petition, the petitioi^e Enguieer aad disciplmaiy petitiQner uiider the (Classificatiori, Ccmtrol and Adnuttedly, there is g| of puiiishaient orders by counsel for fhe petitioner preferred an appeal vide Ani|iR appeUate authonty but fhe 4i In the facts aad particularly ui the is still pending before the aj to entertam the writ directed fhat if the appeal has not been disposed of sf circuiastynce juris^iction <bl'(|fdd)'4*<11rtT^'fa'<l'(('Jl«;l'< ^aif^Tsn^CT Gounsel for the petitioiier. Paael Lawyer for the |been filed chaUenguig the validity of 1^.2003 (Annexure-P/1) by which, the ufiposed a puiiishment of withholdjng ffh non-cuimilative efifect As stated si^er is working on the post of Sub- ^roceedings were drawn againsf the of M. P. (C. G.) Civil Services l^ppeal) Rules; 1966. provision of appeal against passiag |the disciplmary authority. Leamed that the petitioner has already u|iexure-P/10 on 22.3.2004 before ftie 4ppeal has not been decided so far. lcrrcuiastances of the case and when the departmental appeal {ipeUate authority, I ani aot ittclined at this stage. However, it is |filed before the appellate authonty, J3 far, the sairte inay be disposed of ST.ilbmits ^l na gai "*; SP/FS/2005-20,000 ^s <dwir«wicw;y!flwis,.Roi<('fy( mwtBnN ..^('^^..uas^.^iioo ^w^®(^tg%) 3ii^9TqiTR-ii* aansntn**!!* niotith wifhin a period df one certified copy oftius orderb| The petitioner shatl b^ any adverse order is passed Inview offhis order, p| <WOtri4)'dl«lif?)'Ifls'elxfuit^li ^aif^Tsn^CT &oin the daite of prQduction of :foie fhe said aufliorily. at Uberty to approach this Court if by the appellate authbrity. etitioa stauds disposed of. Sd/- Sunil KumarSinha Judge 9 •ai • SSI ^^1 ns^'^ !:U iIiii 3^B nuuuuBuu;^