G, a~te,YVeJ£are v 0 Jabdalour il ‘18]: ( 13 " w.P.No. 2942/2001 WT v1 200 m%m~% mmvghaw) Maw—aw muf‘am mmiiwm WWW *Wm 26/11/2001 D 1 V ' ‘Shri Manindra Shrivastava, counsel for the petitioner. H,a Shri Deep Kesharwanj, learried PL for' the State. Heard . A . 0n 23/10/2001 fixed ‘date SPC was ordered to be issued and the same was issued on 24/10/2001. In order to expedite hearing of the matter, Humd‘ast notice was also permitted. ‘ ORDER It is stated that Humdast notice was effected upon th dents. None represents the respondents 1 5: 2. Shr' m Kesharwani, PL for respondent no.3/State.. The impugned order was issued. on 22/4/2000 (Ann’Ag‘ P/3). Another?xamei Rajesh Nigam. who was $£fected by the" same order, %5 filed the Writ Petition before the High Court "‘ of Madnya pradésh vide Writ Petition no.4054/2ooo challenging« 3 the said impugned order and the same cagge to be disposed of on 18/4/2001. The operati e portion of the order reads as under: & "‘ J " _ “Accordingly. the i pugned order Annexure-P/7 is quashed qua the etitioner. The respon dent no.2 shall. ho ver, be free to take i decision in accords e with law with regard to the services of the titioner“. fox, ' o‘ezou J j EWWW mm ‘ m 200 am W (W) ‘ wwwuatwm mmm Mmm. WWW wmm .;’2 .. W ‘ .’ It - may be stated that thougri the impugned order ‘ ' was issued by which the writ petitioner was dizj ted to m. join at Dantewada. he had not proceeded as in thkm$antime the State of Chatt1sgarh came into existence. It was submittedLsince the pet oner had from the very beginning wishdto join in Madhya Pradesh, his case should the case of Shri Rajesh Nigam was to be co sidered. Though notices were issued, respondents are > .mean—time. the petitioner is at a loss as to where he would join now. It is submit larly respondent -‘ 2 to consider ‘ the case of the petitio and pass necessary orders with :iv that t represented toaay. In the : that it is the responsibility ‘ t of the respondents part i n regard to service of the In the facts and I direct that the petit r be allowed to join a office of respondent no. on 1/12/2001. It is for the respondent 2 to decide f'nally the place of posting and other claims of thewrit petitioner including the claim of his pay and allowances d ring the intervening period. With the aBove ob ervations and directions, this \ 5d]- . {it Chief Justice rit petitioner . i i e rcumstances df the pres? case, the head i Lf‘ GrDRJ—FS/asoelz/zooksonoo. C'C‘ as per rules' é rsnr* l: i rv' u