c . ^\da'-' IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR. WRIT PETITION N0.^ t61 OF 2005 -PBqpIflFIONER ^ RamDeen Chandra S/o Loknath, aged about 40 years, Rural Agriculture Extension Officer ^ ,, (R.A.E.O.), Agriculture ">€^'\^^ft"^^ Department, Marwahi, Dist. Bilaspur, (C.G.) ^.""""~ RESPONDENTS VERSUS ^ 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, (C.G.) 2. Joint Director, (Anchalik Prabandhak, Krishi Jalwayu Chhetriya Pariyojana) Bilaspur, Agriculture Departmen<- Bilaspur, (C.G.) y 3. Deputy Director, Agriculture, Bilaspur, District Bilapur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CQNSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUE OF AN APPROPRIATE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS/CERTIORARI ETC. OR DIRECTION/ORDER IN THE LIKE NATURE ETC. c_^ +' T XI-HC-22 'STT^T'^T f^ri^^Tr^T ® ^^i<=fi ^f^a ^-5E[ ^I^Kn^, ^-ai^^Ko, f®i<rll^^< NTH^TT ^^isb 3T^, ;.l^1i 0\ ^ o^'^ 200 'I^^ST" conseht Shrl A.V. Shridhar. Adw Shrj A.S. Kachhawaha. fjnailv witft The petitioner has flled tne Constitution of jndla (Annexure-P/1) passed by res^ The petitloner Js worl O^icer jn Block Marwahi. (Annexure P-2) custody for more than 48 hoi criminal cases. it is stated trt< 17-9-1994 for offence undej released on 29-9-1994 and| offence under Sectlons 353. Penai Code and on enquiry officer Subrnitted his| was for. The petitioner (Anenxur6-P/3) and denled th< per Annexure-P/4 dated 22-^ one increment and during thej be made except suspension the period of sysuenslon frorr^ for service. The petitioner ^ (Annexure-P/5) under Rul (CiasslfScatJon, Controt and A| he has been acauitted in alj ^cate, counsel for the petitloner. Ov. Govt. Adv. for the State. ^i^y^^i'i ^w^ ^ f^s <F3i^E< i:r'3Tf;W3T^"?T + |thjs petition under Artjde 226/227 of abainst the order dated 11-2-2003 iondent no.2. - ^tng as Rural Agrlculture Extension |e was suspended by order dated }n the ground that he remalned In |irs and conceated hls arrest made in |t the oetitjoner had been arrested on Sections 151, 107 & 116(3) and he agajn arrested on 7-3-1995 for 180, 186, 294 & 506-8 of ihe Indian -3°1995. An enqury'was heid. The report. The petifjoner's expjanation submitted his repiy dated 11-3-2002 charaes. The authorttjes however as -2002 punished him wth stoppage of oeriod of suspension no payment wit( Kjowance. it js however, directed that 1-2-95 to 19-7-2001 wili be continued referred an appea} dated 22-1-2003 23(JJi) of C.G.. CiVii Seryices >t5eai) Ruies 1966 on the ground that criminai cases and he ajso jnformed [Tft"^ ^f^^ \. T =F XI-HC-22 ^sr ^i^H<4, ^-al^^Ko, tN^irey Sff^T^-q^ , 'Go'f ^F^Ior '^. 200 ^ HlN^iT^b^ieb '^^8T' ^Tr^r^T f<rii<=h ^n^i sti^i<=b <-([^a ^H^T-^TT^R: TT^T L^ CM1LI?<n<flr1 'HTOTf ^ fe^t Tf^P^R ^ 37f^PR 37I^T fiiey a&out hls arrest to hls sen petltioner has aiso stated tha| order of punishrnent dated 11\ anu when 'he found the s{ contacted the counsel and fllej that the detay is bona fide condoned. Learned Annexure-P/6 and submlts t'r .suspension allowance wherea^ Ths authorities as oer the as barr^ submits th-at the a< urged by the has djsmisseu by the &eyond 45 may be condoned the of the Against the Dunsshmet is also there. The a| the uut the authority n( by tne and rejected Having consfdered th^ and materjai on rec-ord. in th^ wjli be sen/ed, If the deiay in| is condoned. Accordinaly, t| condoned. The impugned 4 passed &y the respondent s&me ioher on|the anB Detitjctner |or officers. in the said appeai the he has lost the orjglnai copy of the P-2002 served upon htm on 9-8-2002 on 14-1-2003 Immediately he the appeal. In the appeai it is stated [and prayed that the delay may be for the petltioner referred to document |at the petitloner was paid oniy 50% he shouid have been paid 75%. <3rder 11-2-2003 (Anerixure-P/1) |d &y time. Learned counsel for the Ijthority has not at a« consldered the for condonatlon of deiay and the ground that the appeai is preferred Learneu counsel prayed that the tfie authorjties rnay be directed to on merits. it remedy of appeat is provided .and jtMorlty has the turisdictjon to condone ^t at a!l considered the grounds urged |he same mechanicaijy. facts and circumstances of the case opinibn ot' thls Court, ends of justice prefernng the appeai by the petltloner ie delay in preferring the appeal is rder Annexure P-1 dated 11-2-2003 no. 2 is set aslde. The matter Is [Tft^'^fe^ T^ XI-HC-22 '^cl ^ll<41d<4, ^TTl^^Ko, M<r{l<1;j,< 3T^ -^^ ^ 'ipt ?lo\ N8^C<18 9hHra? &r "^. 200 'l^^T' ^TT^r-^T Rril<=h ^3Tit¥T ^^i<=t) Trft^ PatriaK/Cji ^S^T'^H^T'Hf^r -^ remanded^jack to me respoi the appeal Annexurs P-5 pr its own merits in accordance Subject to what has disposed of. Certified c-ooy as per 1dent no. 2 and it is Turther air66t6fl that •^ferred by' the petitloner be decided on •^•ith law as earjy as possj&te. t)een stated above, the petition stands chS^fcn^Tll 'RTTOf ^ 'fe^cft T(^5R '^'^rf^R^T^T liies. Sd/- Fakhruddin Judge T [T[I^ <fo^ ./ '^