^s?^ •^^^^ ^•'"^**'^'^-1-'"" ^s'^ U1 IN THE mGHCOURTOFCHHAmSGARHATBILASPUR WRTT PETITION (S) N0. OF 2010 BETWBEN Sharad Kuxnar Sharma S/o Shri Prem Narayan Sharma, aged about 55 years, occupation Sendce, working as Assistant Grade I, posted at I.T.I. Mahasamund, Permaaent R/o L-18 Green Land , Vishal Nagar, TeHbandha, Raipur, Tidasal and District Raipur (CG). PETmONER AND 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Takniki Shiksha, Janshakti Niyojan, Vigygea Evam Prodhyogik Vibhag, Mafttralay at D.K.S. Bhawan, Ra4>ur, District- Raipi.ir, (C.G.j. ^ 2. TTae Director, Directorate of Emptoyment and Traming, Qihatti^arh, Raipur, Ts&sa and District Raipur (CG). i®spoNDEarra WMT PBTITION U7A 226 OF TSE CORSIITTUTIOR OF DTOIA 11iJj 1. Particularsof&epetitioner: -~ As stated in the cause title. —7S SS^S W R"1 WT3TI^TW)N? Hncff »>*iieh 3^ '*\W\vi<l, SiTll'M'Ko/fqcll'My JA..&..^.Q^.:...^^ 3n^T'(i5w (1pfg^t?) TOIWIT ^ftn aii^r <&» • tsrwef'ss'? ; n.\f£X Sts^S^ S.VE.S'^* 22.11.3010 counbel Shri Awadh Tripatbi, Shii Vaibhav Goverdhan, ^ iisld Grievance of tlie petitione] on 20.3.09, he was put uader departmental eaquiry has also neither auv formal order has beeb the suspension of the petitioner Counsel for fbe petitioner representation (Annexure P/7) have not passed aav order aisfd petitioner may be permitted however submit.s that direction ibav for deciding his representation. State counsel subiaits that representation detaiiing his clau^i his representation would be decjjled. expeditiously. Accordiagly, the petitionet petition wifh .Uberf)r to nialce ^ eventuaUty of making any siich to the resp. No. 2 withiu a pericjd ofreceipt ofcopy offhis onier, t^.e aufhority concerued wifhio a fuiftlier <hrafci<fh 'RFTcif ^f 'fe1^ <P>(^|< ^afflnan^i for fhe petitioner. .L. forfhe State. ia the present pention is that iuspension aad fhereafter, the been coiapleted but tffl da.te passed by the aufhorities nor tias been revoked. feubiuits that. he has also filed a 1|)ut even then tlie resTiondents therefore at this stage, the 9p wifhdraw, this petition. He 4iay be issued to tlie resp. No. 2 let fhe petitiouer inake a fresh to fhe resp. No.2 and in tuni by the competent auftiorily is permitted to wifbdraw fhis fresh representation. IN the •epresentation by fhe petitioner 1 of three weeks froni fhe date saine sha'1 be decided bv the uridaiiBuiriiii^nUiiaillliiNNldiriiBltiii •^, '^'•^te. fi-.riSS^ 1 "s %^.^S&C-!S ifS.^i-y' ani?i qn R-<i+ WT ^TT^9T sb*l!<ft .-y' .:?'. ^I*T<'(T^HT^i 3^ '^WM^, BTlly'IC, f^diyi^.!. ^.^.....U,..Q..T..{^^..S^.:..&.^L^, Jf^flOO SII^fT'q^T (1?(31It's') WIRTTTlfTO^II^f It is made clear th.at thi^ opiaion on merits of the case wouid be at liberty to decide accordaace wifh law considerind ^T'^'fflV't in^ft* ^* 'fe^t <f^[^.K ^aifOT sil^l Court has not expressed an}r and fhe authority concemed fhe representstion stricfly ia aB the aspect ofthe case. Sd/- pritinker Diwakar Judge