.e^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR WP (S) ^-fy^-I OF 2006 PETITIONER: / Dwarka Prasad Bhoria, S/o Shri Safosalal, Age 45 Year, Tracer- Land Record Branch ' ^ .-•'<^r ^y-.''^?* ,^'* Collectorate, District Kabirdham k^ ^•^:^ ^,-' ^'"'L^^^'' ^•'~^;'<-)^-'' vf!y ^" (Chhattisgarh VERSUS RESPONDENTS : /l - Staite of Chhattisgarh Though- Secretary Revenue Department DKS. Bhawan Raipur.[C.G.] 2- Coinmissionerer of Settlement and Land Record, Raipur Oandhi Chowk, Raipur [C.G.] ^^ '\'-^ B8H' 18 K'S ^SfS Writ Petition Under Article 226/.23?-of the Constita.ition of India. 13 ?Ka«- /CT~ XI-HC-22 y_ 5 3^='(pn?pr, 9rn<i'ie, Ri<-iwy bfe 3TI^?I L^.'. nwwrsh*ii<h ^T vf^SR I ~i(:is3^.'..L^ 200 12|<)«d STI^T^T ^Twan^r st>«i<oflfer ) 3Ti^!?r ^RIIW flfer Mo 30.11.2006 Shri Ashok Vajshnav, c| 5mt Anju Ahiya, Dy 64 None for respondent Heard. Vide order dated 11 candidates including Rcuendra^ Vijay Bdiadur Dubey & others") was appointed as appointment, petjtioner joinetj others also joined and were o( them were dispensed with and four others filed ori Administrative Tribunal at quashing tiie order dated 3( terminated and also for re-ins'l Tribunal vide order dated the termination order dated entitled to all consequential petition bearirg WP No.1549/^ of India before the High Cour^ in OA No.1120/1992. TTiis Couj petition filed by the State, Lco^nan Tilocer frctn +l<<tft41-l tfWCTl^te'AiRl'XK ^srf^Hsn^r unsel for the petitioner. for respondent No.l / State. i.2. i.06.1990 petitioner alon9 with other 19 Prasad Supta, Suresh Shukla, Balistar yadov, Sin9h (henceforth "Rqjendra and four by Settlement Officer, Sur9iya. After his services and similarly Rqjendraand four ^ntinuing their services. On 30.03.1992, all of their services. Feeling aggrieved, Rcyendra (ginal application before Madhya Pradesh |Jabalpur (henceforth "the Tribimal") for P.03.1992 whereby their services had been ^ating with all consequential benefits. Learned >.1998 passed in OA No.1120/1992 quashed 130.03.1992 and declared all the petitioners twnefits. Feelin9 aggrieved, the State filed ?9 under Article 226/227 of the Constitution chatlenging the order passed by the Tribunal i|-t vide order dated 22.02.2006 dismissed the (s a result thereof, the order passed by the 27.t)6 ^^.=.^£^SS^R3^ESEi?^^^-=5BB3?CK35n.^ •i^S' XI-HC-22 sn^rw tti-iwsn^T shH Cf?cT padma ,'"/; /^. "» 'CT' 3S?-^WIcf4, ®T(1<rt'is,I°i<'iwy 3TT^5Tq^7 , iiini 9>Hl<*> WT. R'b.ft 'sn^FT ^TTW B^T -2-. Tribunal in QA No.ll20/l992| compliance to order pcssed) Sovernment vide order dateO Rcyendra and four others by a| scale, whereas the same ben| petitioner. The petitioner has soug| re9ulari2ation on the some fo< placed persons alon9 with cons^qi filed a representation before t( same has not so far been decl fruits which other simitorly plac|ed In view of the above decide petitioner s r-epresentff^ within three months from toda^ by MP Administrative Tribuna| 22.02.20)6 passed by this Cou( exi9ency arises, the petitioner With the aforesaid dire< +wfi-f<n"1 KIHcfTfffe^<Rlw;l< ^3^lH3II%?I has presently reached to its finality. In by the Administrative Tribunal, State 23.03.2005 . regularised the services of poirrting them temporarily under regular pay [fit was not given to the similarly placed it reiief that he may be allowed benefit of ^ting as has been allowed to other similarly ;^quential benefits thereof. Althou9h he has ie State Sovernment on06.09.2006, but the ded and he hcs been kept deprived of the persons are ovailing. ircumstances, respondents are directed to ion dated 06.09.2006 pendin9 before them in the light of order dated 27.06.98 passed in OA .1120/92 and the order dated |-t in WP No.1549/1999. Tliereafter, if ony ^ay renew his petition. I'ion, the petition starrisdte^ed of. _ Sd/- V.K.Shrivastava Judge ('fl^^A) / -^' 2: -i-..__^.