(1’4? w; amGU' Q? Bu“ w“ G; S.B (Service Matterl 1N THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHAT’I‘ISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHAT'I‘ISGARH l WRIT PETITIOMS) N0. W58 /2009. PETITIONER: / Madan Kumar Patel, son of Mohan Kumar Patel aged about 45 years reSIdence DharamJaJgarh Tahsxl Dharamjalgarh Dlstnct Ralgarh Chhattlsgarh. Versus Resgondent /1 ‘ State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary Rural Industries Chhattlsgarh D KS Bhawan Ralpur Chhattlsgarh 2. Director of Rural Industries Chhattisgarh [Sericulture Sector), Sonakhan Bhawan, Ring Road, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ‘Deputy Director (Sericulture), Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE \ CONSTITUTION OF INDIA \\ ‘nr.‘ ,m\ m‘ ..\g.x2£s)....éi.:>.xa .‘mm (Wm mmm JU IE C 13.8.2009 Shri C.J.K.Rao, counsel for the petitioner. Shri U.N.S‘Deo, GA. for‘the State. Grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner was given casual/temporary appcintment in the year between 1.01.1989 to 31.12.97 in the department of Sen'culture, Dharamjaigarh, and was work 11g as daily wage employee and as per circular dated Ann P/ 2 dated 5.3.2008, the petitioner is entitled for regu in'on, however, he has not been regularized. Counsel for the petiti ner submits that he is not pressing this petition at this stage, however, he prays for liberty to the petitioner to tile resh representation before the competent authority of the res ondents for his regularization, who, in turn, be further direc ’d to decide his representation within specified period as per ircular of Annexure P] 2. mmw 3211mm Learned counsel for State submits that if the petitioner makes a nesh repre entation for regularization, the same shall be considered and ecided Within a period of three months from the date of rece of the representation. In View of the submiss ons made by counsel for the parties, this petition is dis osed of with liberty to the petitioner to make represen tion for regularization along e e l ' a e i mm W..Q) mm(W) mmm an. with a copy of this order with the competent authority of reprcsentatioxl being made, ti decided by the concerned authority Wirhin a period of three months from the date of recg aangizom mmw ’wmm WM#WW #‘Wm ill a period of (me month before rhe respondents, and on such 1e same shall be considered arid It is made clear that th opinion on merits of the case‘ at liberty to decide the repreé with law. own merits in, accordance Wit! ‘ipt of the representation on its 1 law. is Court has not expressed any and the authority concemed is :entation, strictly in accordance Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge