XI—HC—78 W W , W , W . ..uunuu.uu.in Wm (WW) WW§W®¥§R é s w m WWW 14-7-2006 W.P.Nos.2921/2006, 2877/2006‘ 2873/2006, 2379/2006, 2850/2006, 2882/2006, 2906/2006. 2933/ , 2938/2006, 2940/2006, 2941/2006, 2942/2006, 2960/2006, 2996/2 06, 2998/2006, 3000/2006, 3044/2006, 3045/2006, 3079/2006, 3081/2 6, 3344/2006, 1563/2006, 3177/2006, 3189/2006, 3205/2006, 3222/2 6, 3224/2006, 3225/2006, 3240/2006, '3246/2006‘ 3417/2006, 3418/200 Pefifioners by Shri Kanck Ti nri 6L P.K.C. Tiwary, 5r. Advoca‘res wifh Shri 5hashi Bhushan, Shri Manoj Paranjp , Shri Ji‘rendra Pali, 5hri Vinny Pandey, 5hri Sunil Omani, 5hri Gaufum Khefmpnl Shri AK. Pmsad, Shri Maneesh Sharma, Shri R5, Shrivas'rava, 5hri Rakesh Kumar' ha. Sfafe/respohdenfs by 5hri .K. Vermu, Additional Advotnfe General wifh Shri V.V.5. Murfhy & 5hri 6.K. Beriw I, Depufy Advocafe Generals and Shri Sumesh Bajaj, Governmen‘r Advocafe for fh'e’ fafé. Shri R.P. Mandel, 5ecr'e'l'ar', 5hri N‘S. Bhndoriya, Engineer-in-C Haldkan, CEO, CGRRDA: Shri 5. Services: SIM 5.N. Shrivasfava, S Panchayaf & Rural Developmenf Depar‘rmen‘r: f, Wafer Resources Department 5hri M.L. Gup‘fa. Chief Engineer, Rural Englneering‘ inlending Engineer, PMGSY, Circle: Ralpur (St Offlcer~in~Charge, and Shri Subo h .Shrivasfeva, Execufive Engineer, Wafer Resources Depar‘l‘menfs & Officer-in Charge are presenf in Court Heard. By fhese wri‘l‘ pefifions, fhe pefi‘l'ioners, who are Assisi‘an‘l' Engineers in i Wafer Resources Depar‘rmenf, have hallenged fine orders da‘red 12r6-2006 & 24- 2—2006, whereby fhey have been sen on depufafion ‘l‘o various ofher Deparfmeni's. 6. 2 6 y h e r u XI—HC—78 . m mm,m§,mgt m 200 mm (W) mam ammm mwmm WWEWW éYWm Af fhe oufsef, Shr§ Pramod Verma & 5hri V.V.5. Mur‘fhy made a sfa‘remenf before the Cour-f fhaf if The impug red orders dafed 12-6-2006 & 24-2-2006 are quashed in respec‘r of the pefifioners who have filed pe‘l'ifions before This Caur'r, fhey have no objecfion. nior Advoca‘fe, submi1+ed fhm- a copy of fhe ' affidavit aiong wifh Minufes of Mee ing daied 6—7-200§ has been filed, fherefore, 5hri Kanak Tiwari, learned 5 fhere is every apprehension fhof he respondenfs may pass orders under fhaf scheme in respec‘r of fhe pefifione s and if will affecf fhe pefifioners’ inferesf. Therefore, he wanfs fo file o counfe affidavit The prayer of learned Se ior Advnco‘ie 5hri Kanak Tiwari canno'l be acceded, for The reason ThoT in These wriT peTiTions, The peTiTioners hove quesTioned The legaliTy and corr cTness of The orders doTed 12-6—2006 6i 24-Z~2006 and moreover, The so alled guidelines prepared vide MinuTes doTed 6—7-2006 are noT The subjecT maTT.r in These wriT peTiTions and The responden’rs have noT passed any order under The se guidelines, so far. As such, The prayer mode by 5hr_i Kanak Tiwar‘i is rejecfed. In View of The sTaTemenT mode aT The Bar by Shri P.K. Vermo and Shri V.V.5‘ Murfhy in presence’of The Officers of The 5ToTe, The orders daTed 12-6-2006 6t 24-2-2006 whereby The pefiTioners: who ore working in The WaTer Resources Deparfmenf as Assisfan'l' Engineers and have beensenf on depufq‘rion 1'o various ofhar Deparh’nen‘rs are quns r Soma ‘fied copy of fhis order. ~ \ ‘ Parfies are enfifled for cer‘r Sd/- ' L.C.Bhadoo Judge m ,_ Vg)” g ‘ned and fheir writ pefi‘h'ons are allawed. ’ #w w« ”it I # A g