IN THE HIGHCOURT OF CHHATTISGARHAT BILASPUR IN THE MAT'i‘ER OF WP Narig q?[zoo3 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA -.,_’. PETITIONER _D‘f ' Mukesh Soni, aged about 45 years son of Shri Ramv Sevak Verma, /Medica1 Officer, Primary Health Centre, Kaushal Narr Bhairamgarh, Distt. Dantewada (C.G.). ”é“ hm“ v" 0‘“ $N VERSUS RE PONDENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, ,through : Secretary, Health and Family Welfare, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.). 2. State of Chhattisgarh, through : :7 l aecretary, General Administration Qepartment D KS Bhawan Ra1pur (Chhattisgarh) 3. ‘State of Madhya Pradesh through 5ecretary, Health and family welfare, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal (MR) 4. State of Madhya Pradesh, through : Secretary, General and Administration ‘ Department, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal (M.P.) 5. Union of India, through : Secretary, Ministry of Home and Personnel Training, New Delhi, Delhi. X1—HC«22 WW,W,W 3%%§’§3%§ 19/3/2004 Ms. Sunita Jain, counsel for the petitioner. Shri sanjay S. Agrawal, regpondentS No.1 and ‘2. None for respondents No.3 and 4. Shri V.V.S. Mui‘thy, Add} India f Respondent No.5. Applications for urg€nt h‘ Shri Agrawal and Shri N their rcspectivc respondents. The relief claimed is ag‘ only, ~as such notice to res necessary. With the consent of the finally. The petitioner, who ie a petition challenging the action Doctor, has filed the present ;of respondents in not relieving him, though he,has been finally allocated to the State of Madhya Fradesh. This fact is not disputed 1 This court, while passing Kumar Jain and Others vs; the order dated 17. 12.2003 in W.P.No.5 16['2003 (D’r. Ashok Panel Lawyer for me State} . Standing counsei for Union of earing are allowed. [urthy take notice on behalf of ‘ainst respondents No.1 and 2 pondents No.3 and 4 is not z parties, the matter is heard 3y the other side. {noW \ H » a“? Xi-HC—22 WWW, m,m W “W mumxlo. 18A7 ;&o3 a in great detail. Having thus consider (1 aim in View of the deafision in the aforesaid case, in the o inion of this court, it is directed that the ordor staying the paration of the Idiow'ng order is Without any authority an caimot be sustained and the petitioner is entitled for reli Ving. Accordingly, the W' petition iS allowed and the respondents are directed to relieve the petitioner forthwith. Sdl- Fakhruddin Judge Certifled copy as per 11es. Hie é’r‘m mew we: 2m; E? fig mat! fa‘vfmtanétr mate—cl l ammmetga ’Q .V emit?W I?wWe - e We Ema?! l State of Chhattisgarh and there), has (iealt with the matter