BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR In the Matter or W.P.No. WV O «5/ ” /2oo3. 5f 15x PETITIONE Niranjan Kaushik, aged about 40 y/e,ars, son of Shri Shyamlal /f,<’f{aushik, resident of quarter f number 13—125, Ponce Line Indore, Indore (Madhya Pradesh), present posting: Police Head Quarter, Special Branch, Raipur (Chhattisgarh), VERSUS RVaESPONDENTs 1. State or Chhattisgarh, through: Secretary, Department of Home, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur. State of Madhya Pradesh, through : Secretary, Department of Home, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal, Madhya Prade’sh. i)x 3. Umon of Ind1a through : Secretary, M Mlnmtry of Home New Delhl Dlrector General of Pohce, Police Head Quarter, Raipur (Chhattisgarh). Deputy Inspector General of Police (intelligent), (Gupt Warta), Raipur (Chhattisgarh) E/ z PETITION UNDER ARTICLE m CONSTITUTION OF INDIA' FOR I M. WARRANTO. THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS _ _: CERTIORARI _ _ _ _ _ _ QUO _ S 11.7.2003 Petitioner by Shri Sushil Dubey, Advocate. State by Shri Rajcsh Pardéy, Government Advocate. Shri V.V.S. Murthy, Add]. Central Government Standing CounSel for the Union of India. Shri RS’ Jha, Addl. Advocate General for the State of MP. Heard. finallyt Counsel for the petitionelt‘S) submits that they have supplied the copies of the petitions with Annexures to the counsel for the State ol‘ C.CL / .P. and the Union oflndia. However, one extra copy be supplied and the acknowledgements thereof be obtained. Counsel for the petition r(s) submits that these matters are squarely covered by decision of this Court in W.P.No.2353/2002 (Mallesh' ulnar ’I‘iwan' Vs. Union of India and others) decided on 28.4 2003. They pray that similar orders may be passed in thee eases also as they are similar. It is stated that the statemer t is made at the Bar after due verification. ' Counsel for the respond nts submit that the petitioners have approached belatedly \ \ it is not possible to decide the [vieW e r XI-HC—22 r representations by the Central Govemment Within the time schedule as mentioned in W.P.N0.2353/2003 decided on 28.4.22003‘ Counsel for the itioners are not in a position to dispute this. They, howeve , pray that their matters be considered. Accordingly, relying on th statement made by counsel for the parties on the instruc 'ons received, as stated, the petitions are disposed of with observations as made in W.P.No.2353/02 (Makesh K mar Tiwari Vs. Union of India and others) decided 28.4.2003 subject to the modification that the 'petitione s, if so desire, may make a detailed representation raising ir grievances alongwith the documents within ten days from today to the Central x'Government addressed to e Government of India, Department of Personnel and T aining, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensio s, Loknayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi (State Reor anisation Cell). Said copy of the representation duly suppor ed by all relevant documents be also served on the concer ed Department of both the States after obtaining the ack owledgement and both the States may forward the same to the Central Government with their comments and the requi ite information and complet entral Government to decide details in order to enable the New :vxw1 p ‘ t e e h e \ t kl—Hczz the representation. It is open to the Central Government t0 seek such further information from the State Governments and on Such requisition b ing made from the Central Government; the State Gover ents will supply the same. On such representation being ade, the Central Government may consider and decide the same expeditiously by passing appropriate orders ‘as deeme fit and proper, in accordance with law. In View of the above, .W.P and I.A., if any, stand disposed of. Certifled copy as per ‘ I; \ Fakiru-ddl“ Judge r s