COURT FEES EXEWPTEO BY NOTIFICATIONNO. 98SO/D-287(Wi)tt- "teC^G.W AS SPEOREBINSCffiMlE t OFTHECOUflTFEESNn'im IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH W.P. (U N0. ^aiS. /2009 PETITIONER: A State ofChhattisgarh, Through: Divisional Forest y' p(***^' ..—••"^-fr' iiiruuK": C^.^'fr^^^ Officer^ Forest Division ^.:.l-'t-^""-^n.-"* Kawardha.,'S>tsH.Kabirdh; ^ RESPONDENTS: Kawardha.,'S>tsH. Kabirdham (C.G.) VERSUS 1. ' Krishna Kumar Sharma, S/o - Prabhat' Chand Shanna, Mess Road,^ Cinema Line, Dongargadh,' District ^(C.G.) Rajnandgaon, 2. The Labour, Court, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AB. :*».. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR W.P. (Ll No. 2212/2009 Petitioner State of Chattisgarh Versus Respondents Krishna Kuiaar Sharma and aaother WRIT PETITIQN UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OFTHE CONSTITUTION OFINDIA (SB; HonTale Shri Satish K. Agmhotri J7j Shri Yashwant Singh Thakur, Advocate for fhe petitioner/ State. Shri PaiikajAgarwal, Advocate forths'Tespondent No.l. O RD E R (Passed on this 08ih Day ofDecember, 2009) 1. The petitioner/State has ffled fhis petition chaUengiag fhe order dated 27-03-2008 (Annexure P/1), passed by the Labour Court, Rajnandgaon in Case No.93/ID/2007 (Refl, whereby the petitioner/State was directed to reuistate fhe respondent No.l without bacfc-wages. 2. SIui Yashwant Singh Thakur, learued Deputy Advocate General appearmg for fhe petitioner/State submits fhat pursuaut to fhe order dated 27-03-2008 the respondent No. 1 has been relastated in service and fhereafter he has been regzilarized. There was no question of back-wages, as there was no order of the Court below. 3. Learaed counsel appearing for the respondeat No.l submits that fhe respondent No. 1 has been reuistated ia service and fhereafter be bas been regularized, pursuaiit to the order dated 27-03-2008. He furtber subimts that the respondent No. 1/em.ployee is not clauniag any back-wages, as the same was also not graated to hirn by the Labour Court. Since fhe impugned order was passed on 27-03-2008 and the respondent No.l has been reiustated ia service and fhereafter he —2-- bas been regularized, 110 UseftA purpose would bc served, if (he casc is decided on inerit. Even otfaerwise, this Court can exercise equily jiuisdictton ia the factsofthc case under Article 226/227 ofthe Coiistitution Qflndia. 5. Looking froni aU angles, equity lies ia favour of the respondent No.l, Thus, no interfercnce is warraated. Accoidingfy, fhe Wnt petition is dismissed. No order asto costs. Sd/- Tumm. Satisfa K. Agnihotril! Judge { •» Ate