^'l' 3?TT^T ^t Rl^Jcb ^WT3TT^TsF1lN? "5"^ ^WW^, ^Tll^l^Ko, f®l<ni<rj^< ^^£^j.....qs!.l±.. w "Wl 200% ^n^s?T^^K (^i^^) ^wi^R ^ifta 3TT^?T cM<i(<yi€iii'RW^ff ^ i^S <P^^i< ^T 3tfiTH 3TI^T PETITIONERS 1. Parasl-4-am Stngh Chouhan, aged about 52 yeai's, | son of Late Shri Maiigal Smgli Chouh^n, presently working as Head Consta^le Radio Operator m Office of SFTC Bilaspi|T Zone, Distt. Bilaspur (CG) 2, Roopki^hore Bhagoriya^ aged about 44 years, |son of Shri Basanti Lal Bhagoriya, present Police Distt. I tty working as Head Telecommunication, ^u-g (CG) fersvLS Constable ta BhUai Zone, RESPONDENTS 1. State o: Chhattisgarh, through^ the Chief Secretaijy, Dau Kalyaii Suigh Bhawar^ RaipLU' (CG) 2. State ofl RaipLU' (| 4. The Dirl Madhya Pradesh through the Chief Secretaijy, Ballabh Bhawan^ Bhopal (M.P.) 3. The Diilector General of PoUce, Police H.Q. ^G) ;ctor General of Police, Police H.Q., Bhopal (MP) 5. Dy. Ins|pector General, Teleconimunication, Police H^ad Quarter Raipur (CG) 6. Union |of India, through fhe Secretary^ Mirustryl of Persoru'iel, Public Grievanc^e, Khan Market, Writ Petition under Artic New DeUii. e 226/227 of the Constitution of India S.B. Hon'bie Shri Dhirendi{a Mishra, J. 14-10-2008 Shri Vipui Tiwari, coun|sel for the petitioners. ^^^T ^^T 9,^11^, <Wi^ltd —FS/197—3/2008 —40,000. -^^?:' ^ f^ ^n^T^FT fqiw WT 3TT^[ $»i*iicft '755T ^l<^ld<4, ©Tll-M^Ko,[®l<rll'M*1,< ^t^. ^^ WNdI W<1<1» ^200^ 3n^?i Tra^ (<ici^q<i4) <s«ii^Rtlfta ^TT^T Shri JA Lohani, counsel By this petition under of India, the petitioners h|ave mipugned th.e Circular dated 22.3.2001 (Amiexure P/1) is! of the State of MP, whei^by prmciples/procedure for final aUocation of the State euiplo] the State of Cl-ihattisgarh, ha^ been not'ified. Grievance of the petitijoners is fliat they had given fhetr option for the State of MP ar|d addressed several representations (Annexure P/3) in this reg, have prayed for.setting as therewith, it is observed tha document regarding fmal allc of Chhattisgarh. Challenge procedures to be followed which were dulv notified on of tfie State Advisory Conim than seven years. cbl^f<v!^i^l 'RW^ff ^f 1!^x^t <P»l^l< ^3tRTR3TT^T for respondentNo. 6/UOI. Article 226/227 of tiie ConsUtution ued by the State Reorganization Cell yees working in the State of M.P. to U'd, however, theu' representations were not considered. In tl'|iese -€ircum.staiices, tlia petitioners .de the principles and procedures followed (Amiexure P/1) in 411ocation of services to the State of MP. From perusal of tiie wri|t: petition or the d£>cumentsannexed t the petitioners have not filed any ^cation of their services to the State is made to the principles and for allocation of services of fhe employees of State of MP t|) State of CG vide Annexure P/l, ^2.3.2001,. on the basis ofdecisions i|ttee, that too, after a lapse of more 5ii^^- ^r^r g^nw, <wi^iic< — FS/l 97—3/2008—40,000. /,^ !k;!^ ^a^ ^."% 'ToEf ^ww^, ^>^\ww, [®icni^^< *<INdl ^qj<^-—"""""""""""""""-"-"""^200^ ^n^r '^SK (^i^^) 3H^T'SRT'RplN? ^WT 3TT^T sb^lJcb r t7 i?^<nw ^f^r ^n^r reasons For the aforesaid been filed after niore tiian i cause of action, if any, aro^ disniissed on the ground of| and is accordmgly, disniissec^ cbNfd^l'1 "RTR^f ^ fe^ if^^R '^3TfiTH3TT^T the instant petition, which has even years from the date on which .e to the petitioners^ deserves to be clelay, at the adniission stage itself Sd/- DhirendraMishra Judge ^T^^T ^T y^ii^, »wi^iici —FS/197—3/2008 —40,000.