wj‘q '1 www‘} \ RESPONDENTS : 1. Sandesh Kumar Bhoi s/o Dhelu Ram, aged about 39 years, working as attendant in the ofiice of Dy. Director, Veterinary Service, Korba, posted at Rajkamma, Distt. Korba (C.G.) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Veterinary Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) Director, Veterinary Services, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Dy. Director, Veterinary Services, Distt. Korba (C.G.) Joint Director Veterinary Services Bilasour (C G) 4. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agmhotn, J Present: Shri P.S.Koshy, Advocate with Shri Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate for the petitioner. Shn' Y.S.Thakur, Deputy Advocate General for the State/ Respondents. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0. 1095 of2009 ORDER ORAL 1. Grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner was working as Swchchakar in the oiiice of respondent No. 3. The respondent No.3 , vide its order dated 12m May, 1999 (Annexure P/2), granted regular pay scale to the petitioner and other similarly situated employees. However, the same was subsequently withdrawn vide order dated 09m February, 2000 (Annexure P/3) passed by the respondent No. 4. Being aggrieved by the 1 above order one Vishnu Prasad Dahire filed a petition being Writ Petition (S) No 3264 of 2005 (Vishnu Prasad Dahire v State ofMadhya Pradesh & Others) bet‘ore this Court and the same was allowed Vide order dated 28m (Passed on 08 day of September, 2GG9) July, 2006 (Annexure P/4) and he was held entitled for regular pay scale w.e.£ 12m May, 1999. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the instant petition may also be disposed of in terms of order passed in the matter of Wshnu Prasad Dahire (supra). On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/respondents submits that in case the petitioner files representation against his grievances, the same shall be considered and decided by the competent authority in terms of the order passed in the case of Vishnu Prasad Dahire (supra). In view of the above submission of learned counsel for the parties, the instant petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to make a detailed representation before the respondent No. 3, raising all his gievances raised in this petition. On such representation being made, the same shall be considered and decided by the competent authority in terms ofthe order passed in Vishnu Prasad Dahire (supra) expeditiously. Sd/- l l i i Satish K. Agnihotri i, Judge ‘ l l l