@ y M 7 Ck IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATT $§§RH $1} BILAS’PUR warr PETmca a0. - ”*mkl-lzaag 1N THE MATTER OF: SHRI CHHAITU RAM JANGDE AGED §BOUT #5 YEARS 3:0 SHRS MAKHMJ LAL Resident of ~ Pausari Post. — Kamaia, The. - Simga, Dis“. - RNPUR [C.G.} PETITIONER «‘3 VERSUS 1. ‘ SECRETARY PUBUC WORK DEPARTMENT MANTRALAYA, RAWUR ma.) 2. S1§§§EF E§i3iiéEER PUBUC WORK DEPARTMENT RATPUR, {c.a} L, 3.? EXECUTWE‘EHGTH EER P.W.D.- DWTSTON N0. 2 RATPURJCE} ' 4 SUB-DIVTSIONAL OFFICER ‘ PUBLIC WGRK DEPARTMENT BALOBA BAZAR, RNPUR €08} RESE‘Cm‘TEENTS 'EtSTATF. or c'ei. m $eC7‘WV3/ FU%C“’3}\9M< 9 mamewb To Th; Hon’bTeséqggofljstice §qapkjg 05‘Jwy >N¥y Ccmpanion Justices of {he Han‘ble High Court of Chhaitisgam ai Bilaspur, .w‘ PETITTON UNDER ARTTCLE 22 {22? OF THE ¢ON$TTTUTIQN QF lFiDlA 4 ” XE»HC-22 3§iq$l W wvim‘ 5:1 m: m fawn am 311$ 3%? Wé g I 2E l am ma? were ' I vi .......W 2W)? (ix ($5111 \ .‘ ‘ 13.11.2002 Shri Kamal Mohan Gupta counsel for the petitioner. Shxi Ranbir Singh, G.A. f r the State. Heard. In View of the limited con oversy involved in this petition, as the same can be disposed of t the admission stage. Admittedly, the petition r. was a daily Wage employee under the Public Works, Dep ent working at Bhataparas It is l the case of the pe1itioner that téough he had hiorked cotiijnuous three yearS, his services were terminated by an oral order. It ‘s his further case that a circular of Chhattisgarh through General was issued by the Government Administration Department bearing No.320i GAD/ 2000, dt.02nd December 2000 regarding reins whose services had been termii of said circular, the petitioner i lad submitted an application on 11.2.2002 for taking him back as a daily wage employee, however, no action having been taken, he has approached this Court with a prayer to the respondents to reconsider his case. tatement of daily wage employees lated. Accordingly, on the basis ‘ Without ahy break for more th , no useful purpose Will be serve i in keeping this petition pending x Accoxdingly, this writ the raspondem: No.3 and Works Department as is ( :ompetent to do solconsider the representation of the petj tioner and pass an appropriatz petition is disposed éf by dirccting on such authority in the Public to s $1) /" 0rd€f3 thm‘EOIL Within a 1s$riod 'of 6 Weeks from the date ofé> :ertmed copy of this order. It is is not expressing any opinion on the elititlement of the petitioner’s the men‘ts of the case as claim is to be decided by the authorities on its own men'ts. With the direction/0 bservation made above, the Writ Consequently, I.A.No. 1629/ 2002 petition stands disposed of. for urgent hearing also stands disposed of. Au jam/- 4 Sd/- P.C-Naik Judge « § %\\\\é‘\ F § v N \ communication/receipt— of t made clear that the Court Certined Copy as per Iules. ‘.‘ GRPRJ_FS/3 1 14/2001 50,000. i mm mm t , Wm(§a‘?§a§a) mmmwsa wafedame‘‘wferimm emm WW