*/ • ^of. IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRrrPETITIQN NOJ^7-^—1 2006 PETITIONER .oV~:r>' €^. '^'^y3/ y-6..^\y' ^ -^^' <y^o " <^'' ^ Smt. Amrika Bai Sahu, W/o Late Vijay Ram Sahu, Aged about 40 years, R/o Sonarpara, Rajnanagaon, C.G. Presently working as Chowkidar, World Food Godown, Forest Office Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh VERSUS "? yy^'" RESPONDENTS ^. 1. State ofChhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department of General Administration, D.K.S. Bhawan Mantralaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh ^i. Chief Conservator of Forest, Government of Chhattsigarh, Jail 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. XI-HC-78 *11+1WI sh*lich 3^ •^ww^, »Tfl«'is,Ri<'ii+fy< ^-^.^.w.lQi. ^ 200 OT^TIRR? (tj^igg^sr) sn^r^rR^iik gsT'.sn^TaiiTR; ??aTW^tT3TI^T <!bi<iFci4)-i iiinTfffe'^l'tRi'KK ^arf^irsn^r •2i) 24.7.2006 Mr. Satyendra Sahu, Miss Deepali Pandey, P.L Heard. The main grievance of Down Chowkidar in World Food adhoc basis, is that as per who had been killed in naxalliti entitled for regular appointmen^ cbted 24.9.1994 (Annexure P-< petitioner has been appointe^ appointments were made on re^uli was not given similar treatmen| petitioner made several respondent No.3 js not decided In -the circumstances submitted that even •Hiough representations but they arej petitioner may be allowed to respondent No.3 and in -hjm, r^s the representation of petitior^er tearned counsel for respondents^ h< Adv^cate for •the petitioner. For the State on advance copy. t(ie petitioner, who is working as 60- podown, Forest Office Rajnandgaon on pol cy of the Sovemment -the employees activities, their dependents shall be and in pursuance of 1+iat yide order 12 appointments were made and the on adhoc basis, whereas other 11 re^ular basis and as such, the petitioner nen|t- as given to llie other persons. TTie re^resentations in this regar-d, but the same. (eamed counsel for the petitioner the petitioner has already made not being dec'ided, therefore, the make a detailed representation to r^spondent No.3 be directed to decide in accordonce with law, to wAiich snts^ hos no objection. r;lX>. XI-HC-78 sn^Tqirf^TO? (PB 311^1 **<?+ ^ Roshan/- Y '\/ 4°. ^/^ ^/,(& fo ^/1>" 7/<"^ Tq'^iTiTRra', ^-rfly'id, fsfcfiy^ *11*IMI Sb*1|ch ••'•->••"••--•'••/'••'••-;.... ^ 200 3TT^?T<ra^T (lcli^°fi^8T) WcffWHfersn^T z! TOlfe?frT WRfffffe^t rfSRCT ^3Tf^R'sn^r Havin9 heard leamed co|unsel for the part-ies and having regard to the facts and circumstanc^s of -the case, wilhout expressing any opinion on the merits of the dpse, the petitioner is allowed to make a detailed representation raism^ all her grievances to respondent No.3 within 10 days from today aloi g with copy of •this petition and in 1um, respondent No.3 to decide th^ repre^tation of petitioner within 60 days from the date of receipf of representation after considering all the grievances raised by the ^etitioner in accorckince with Inw. With the directionafo^esaid, the petition stands disposed of. Certified copy as per r^les. L.C. Bhadoo Judge P.T.O. \1^ ^