@ ^;;:'it'?i? '*• ?..:..„„ -. "••'"'.*'•.£3^';;;^ BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHAmSGARHl ^2fo. W.P. (S) No. of2010 PETITIONER ^ A^^5 e^P>-'"" '<1''» tA*1'* 4<^y--' ^^y c.c^ RESPONDENTS Murlidhar Sahu, S/o Haldhar Prasad Sahu, aged about 45 years, working as Choukidar, Govt. Higher Secondary School Sonbarsha, Tahsil-ICharsia, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) VERSUS r: State of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary Tribal Welfare, Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2. Commissioner Tribal Welfare Department Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 3. Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department Raigarh, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) 4. Murlidhar Sharma, S/o Keshav Prasad Sharma, Assistant Grade - III, Govt. High School Bijna, ^ Block-Tamnar, (Raigarh) Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) 5/ Shyam Sunder Patel, S/o Jageshwar Prasad, aged about 38 years, Assistant Grade -III, Govt. Office of the Block Office Dharamjaigarh Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, XI-HC-22 sn^r^ii h-f Sf^f sh+fich •flf?ff ^sr -^WId^, riTi1'y<lio, facii'yy wfvfi *Nrai..4J..-..^...a^)...fX^'-l^.2-€>f^ fa'l'KiST' -^. SIT^T'^R'IWHfel • W^IB?' ••• 13-13. Shri Harish Khiintiya, coun^ Sbri Piaveen Das, Dy. G.A. fi)r Heard on admission. By this petition, the petition|er direction to grant of promotion[ benefits. It is subiaitted fhat thd workuig as dafly wage einployee i^il on was regularized on 16.7.20091, fhough he has been regularizej: proiaotion ou fhe post ofAssistantj Counsel for the petitioner dated 29.10.2010 (Aimexure P^ coinpetent authority aad at fhis served if he inav be permitted to t direction to the coiapetent autt^ority representation of the petitioner. State counsel subniits that lt representation to fhe concemec!) objection if auy direction is bej representation iu accordance with Accordiiigly, fhe petitioner i^ petition with Uberty to m.ake a authority concemed wifhin a date of receipt of copy of this froin the aufhorities concemed ordler ^i)Al[c')ifiT1 ^\WV1\ ^ fs^t ^^.K i? apgii 3ii^?i |el for fhe petitioner. the State. has prayed for issuance of wifh aB the consequential petitioner who was iaitially rtfh effect from 18.7.88. later . Acconlm.g to the petitioner y. but has not been given Grade-III. fb.at his representation f4) is pendiag before the ^tage, fhe purpose would be ndfhdraw fhis petition wifh a to decide tlie pending 't the petitioner inake a fresh autlioritv aad he has no |iitg issued for decidmg his llaw. i^ pennitted to wifhdraw this fresh representation to fhe of three weeks' fro.ui the and ia tum it is expected t|o decide the same within a [^i-feT 1T »f?'SW;-^ 'S^StS'i M IXI-HC-22 / s 'S^ ^WIvl^, »fll<H'IS, («l<ni'M1,< 0 tffWT ai*<i<^ 3TRf?T XRW .U.=..&..Q.J..^^^;fc "al fq^T' aiI^CW r^ich si^i ^w^ 'fffi^r sn^r're'iwafef 1.- furfher period of six inonths froi^l the date of its i^cei] accordaace with law. It is inade clear fhat this C opinion on inerits of tiie case a^id the autjiority conceraed woiild be at Uberty to decide fhe r^ strictly in accordaace with law. <hni(n41i •HH(?il''^ I^1^ <f^i-^l< ^arfigiisn^i iourt has not expi^ssed aay presentation of fhe petitioner Sd/- Pridnker Diwakar Judge lif"1