C^ I BEPORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OP CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR. WP [S] No..J.L|.^1/2010 Petitioners: -o^ '^'.^•••'. ?v^--^ i.y.-^" ^.^'iM^- ^-^'^^•^ ^ l^ iW^ ^s^ Respondents: ffiB Snit. Krishna Yadav w/o Prahlad Yadav Aged about 38 years, R/o Irrigation Colony, Thunsekela, P.0. Kharsia-(Tah.) Raigarh Dist. CG State Versus ^ l.StateofC.G. Through: Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt.ofCG DKS Bhawan, Raipur. CG State. ''2. Chief Engineer, Water Resources Deptt, Hasdeo Banko Project, Bilaspur, CG State. ^ 3. Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, Minimata Hasdeo Project, Kharsia, Raigarh Dist, CG State WRIT PE'nnQN.UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FQR^SSUANCE OF APPROPMATE WRITSfS] ORDEMSI DIRECTIONIS1 ETC. H1GH COURTOFCHHA'ITISGARHATBILASPUR WMT PETITION ) No. 3474 of2010 PETITIONER Smt. Krishna Yadav. VER8US RESPOND^NTS : State ofC.G. & 2 Otiiers. WRIT PETITION LTSTDER AKTICLE 226 OF THE CONSmLTION OF Present: JDIA SB: Hon'ble SSiriSatishK.AsiuliQtri.J. Sflri K.R.Nair, Advocate forthe petitioner. Shri P.K.Bhaduri, PaBcl Lawver forthe State/'r. .ClllS. /Pfl.""^ .^^ O131 ..•''•—T^' T?^^^^^"' '^ni 1^ i .i"(.lSySU UII VI iJi.lV oi r^'Drui.irv^ —,vii ^ Leamed counsel appeari.ng for the petitioner submits that tlie petitioner vvas appointed on daily wages basis on compassionate si'ound. However, in the communication dated 04.08.2004 (Aanexure P/5), it vvas clai-ified that if tiie compassionate appointment exceeds 10% of the vacancies, the appointment on daily wages may be considered for regulanzation. Sliri Bliaduri, leai'ned counsel appeariiig for the State/respondents submits that if a representation is made by tbe petitioner, the same shall bo coiisiaci-ed in accordaiice with the vanous executive instructions issued by the State Goveniment in respect of the gnevaiice snvolved IB this case. Shri Nair, leanied counsel appearmg fbr tlie petitioner subnuts tliat in vievv ofthe above subniission made bv leamed counsel fbr tlie State/respondents, t.n.e petilioaer does not want to press tius petiiion on merits. Howevsr, fhe petitioner may be permitted to niake a representafion to the respondent authorities with a direction to the State/respondents to consider the same, as a-tbrestated. It is ordered accordmgly. ConsequentlY, tlie writ petition is disposed of with ilie aforestated obsen7ation and direction. .-——- Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge