y ^i^T'^i'^lN? ^w^nt^T^iNF ^ ^l 'T^T T<lNl<n4, ^Tl1^4i<o, I^RT^ <nwiTww<as» "^200 ^n^T <<:ra^B (^ti^^) ^?nw^ft^3?i^T ohs^td^l^ ^ITR^f ^ fe^ '^S'SR^R '^3?R8H3?T^i Sinale Bench: Hon'ble IVIri. Justice Dhirendra Mjshra) W.P.rsliNo.438/09 (Petition U/A 226 ofl Constitution of India) PetltLoner Smt. Sanjee^an Lal Shriwas, aged about 54 years, Workin^ lntegrat| District \ Vs ResDondents F^am Kunwar Shriwas, W/o Shri as Supervisor, Sector-Bade Tumnar, ^d Child Development Project, Geedam, pouth Bastar, Dantewada (CG) 2. 3. Stat^ of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Dep^rtment of Women & Child Dev^lopment, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, Distr|ict Raipur(C.G.) Coll^ctor, South Bastar, Dantewada (C.G.). Proj^ct Officer, Integrated Child Dev^lopment Project, Geedam, South Bast^r, Dantewada (C.G.). Present: Mr. P.M. Shrivas, Adv. forthe petiti Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer for &ner. State. the 23.01.2009 Heard. By this petition the petition^r has prayed for a direction to the respondents to pay her subsistejnce allowance for the suspension period and further pay her salary 1|rom the period when she joined her services after deemed revocation o|f her suspension. Case of the petitioner is tha|: whiis the petitioner was working as Supervisor, Sector-Bade Tumn^r, Integrated Child Development Project, Geedam, District South pastar, Dantewada (CG), she was placed under suspension for alle^ed irregularity in the distribution of ^l^^ ^^<1 ^uj^4<M'3K41M—FS/95—11/2008—1,00,000. ""i "%... j '^«^ 3 I. >.:.'IJ '"^s^" ^i^r^t^ihT iCT3?TI^T^qN? vH A. 'S'^r ^i^Kn^, ^'ai^i^ t^Tray <nw(iw<<ra» "^ 200 ^TI^T '(WF (^i^^T) 'FRiTW^ti^ ^ir ffi-^ ord4r subslstence period|when supplementary nutrition vide Since no charge sheet was issuec| herjoining on 2.6.2008 in the offi| suspension deemed to be revok^d petitioner has not been paid period as also salary for the Learned counsel for the this petition at this stage, representation before respondent| may be directed to consider & Ms. Jain, learned panel lav|i that if the petitioner files same shall be consjdered and dfec period of six weeks from the date In view of the above, this petitioner to make detailed represjei this order, to respondent No.2 rai< petition. On such representation | decide the same in accordance v|/i from the date of receipt of represetit; Consequently, I.A. No.1, 4t also stands disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. how^ver decjde represe^tation 3f represejitation ^J^f.^^l^ *1MW '? "fe^ <J^I^S< '^3ffm3?n^r dated 6.11.2007 (Annexure P-1). to the petitioner, the petitioner gave i|;e of the Project Officer treating her vide Annexure P-2. However, the allowance for his suspension she hasjoined herduties. petjtioner submits that he is not pressing he may be allowed to make No.2 and in turn, respondent No.2 the same within specified period. 1/yer appearing for the State submits before respondent No.2, the l^cided by respondent No.2 within a receipt of representation. p^tition is disposed ofwith liberty to the ^sjentation, along wjth certified copy of >ing all her grievances, raised in this [being made, respondent No.2 shall ^ith law within a period of six weeks pplication for grant of interim relief Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge ^ll^<fl^ ^^T ^U<^^ <M-1S^8M—FS/95—11 /2008—1,00,000.