IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARH) W.P. (S) No. $1M /201o PETITIONER Deepak Kumar Nag, So. Shri Govind Ram Nag, aged about 42 W yeara, Nagrl, R/o. Tahs11.Mu—kam Nagrl, 85 Post Distt. — 40¢ m. \ Dhamtari (C.G.) ... VERSUS RESPONDENTS / (l) State of Chhattisgarh through its Secretary, Department of Forest, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) (2) Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division (Samanya), Dhamtari, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) (3) Depot Officer, office of Depot Officer (forest), Nagri, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) INDIA / / / mmatma 69a 12n2010: S B : HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. PRITINKER DIWAKER Shn' Vinod Deshmukh, counsel for the petitioner. Smt, Smita Ghai, PL for the State. Grievance of the petitioner in the present petition is that though he i5 entitled for his regulémization on the post of Forest Guam, he has been mgularized on tha post ofwatchman. ubmits that the respondents Counsel for the petitioner have completed all the formalities or passing necessaxy order in favour of the petitioner and theref ‘ re at this stage the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file a fresh representation beime respondent No.2 and the same may be directed to be decid expeditiously as possible. Counsel for the State suba the fact he cannot make any s Government is Willing to regulan‘zt on the post of Forest Guard o objection if the yetitioner makes authority concerned and the accordance with lav/if disposed of with a direction Accordingly, the petition is that in the event of any representation filed by the petitioner his grievances, the same is before respondent No.2 raising ed in accordance with law as its that without ascertaining tatement whether the State : the services of the petitioner r not. However‘ he has no a representation before the same is decided by it in ‘ [the ate?) mm W 200 m mm mvfé‘d mmmafm rm, expected to be decided by th¢ WWdWmA émwmanéw a authority concerned accordance with law as expeditiousl'yas possible. It is made Clear that this C( opinion on men'ts of the case ax would be at liberty to decide the re} strictly in accordance with law. )urt has not expressed any Ld the authority concerned bresentation of the petitioner Sdl- Pritinker Diwaker Judge 1n [me a: