@ Q; §x <1) Single Bench IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (c. G.) w.P.(S)No.H'+LW 12011 PETITIONER iawkeshwar Chouhan S/o w Late Itwari Prasad Chouhan, aged about 25 years, R/o Banipathar, Tahsil — Kharsia, District — Rajgarh (C.G.) RESPONDENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through-Secretary, Panchayat and Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.). 2. The Collector Raigarh, District — Raigarh (C.G.) 3. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Kharsia, District — Raigarh (CG) a WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE f f CONSTITUTION QEINDIA_I_-. / WW,$§W,W . ’ . JU t N A 19.08.2011 shri C. P. Lahrey, c sel for the petitioner. Shri N. N. Roy, P.L. f r the State. Grievance of the peti ioner is that his father late Itwari Prasad Chouhan wh was working as a peon In Janpad‘ Panchayat Khar ia died on 22.06.1997. According to the petitione his case for compassionate appointment has airea y been forwarded by respondent No.3 i.e. th Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Kharsia but tili date the same has not been decided. Learned 'counsel for the petitioner submits that the purpose of filing this petition would be served if direction is issued to respo dent Nos. 2 & 3 to consider the case of the petitioner s expeditiously as possible. i submits that the case of the petitioner would be de ided in accordance with law if not decided. He furthe submits that the petitioner l can file a fresh reminder to respondent Nos. 2 & 3 l along with copy of this ordy r. Accordingly the petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file a fresh representation i Learned State coun o n Wm.($.7q7 J! W1 zoo mW (WEI) 611%?! WW mmm mm 11%?! 3117131 WWWW ‘§W WK $ aim m 072/ XI-HC—78 Wmfm mmm m “W .§ TWWW ammm éiaifdwm before respondent Nos. 2 & 3 within three weeks from today and in the eventuality of fiiing any such representation the same wouid be decided by the concerned authority in accordance with iaw as expeditiously as possibie. It is made clear that is court has not expressed any opinion on the merits fthe case and the authority concerned would be liberty to decide the representation strictly in a cordance with law after due scrutiny of the facts. Sd/- @V Pritinker Diwaker Judge h a 0