1.-J/ c ,<?.< <3',0 •u; c; fCHHATTISGARHl W.P.NO.^toM OF 2004 PETmONER C. S. Verma, S/o Shri M. H. Verma, aged about 50 years, Occupation - Service, posted as Mining Inspector in the 0/0 The Collector, Raigarh District Raigarh [C.G] RESPONDENT5 ^t4lfl^'l VERSUS 1. StateofChhattisgarh through Secretary, Department of Mining, Mantralaya, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur [Chhattisgarh]. 2. Director, Geology & Mining Chhattisgarh, Sonakhan Bhawan, Ring Road, No.l, Village Ravigram, Raipur [CG] 3. Dilip Dongaonkar, Assistant Mining Officer, District Office Bilaspur [Chhattisgarh] 4. Y. R. Sahu, Assistant Mining Officer, District Office Raipur Dist. Raipur [Chhattisgarh] 5. M. L. Kesharwani, Assistant Mining Offlcer, District Office Dhamtari [Chhattisgarh] WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF ^THE coNSTrrunoN OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF wRmN NATURE OF CERTIORARI, MANDAMUS PROHIBmOllAIID OTHER SUFTABLE WRTT OR WRTTS. DIRECTION OR DIRECTIONS* ORDER OR ORQERS: QV L^^ f^~"~~~^'—^ T XI-HC-22 ^•^ ^jNia^, ^t^TS, fa<ni^y ^3 '-^, ./ ^TR^lI^^gch SflT^T ^W ^) •f.I^o. 334^/0. 200 •^^sy' 'STT^T'^T [<rii<=h 'STJ^T s^^ich ^f^a 3:n^r'^n^R ^rftcT <^l^(<rt^lri 'HT^ff ^ f^^i' <r3t^K i7a?rf^Hw^T 29/10/2004 Shri Maiimdra Shrivasta SIiri Siiniesh Bajaj, Respondents No,l aad 2, Smt Fouzia Mirza, |?a, counsel for flie Petitiouer, [Deputy Govt. Advocate for fhe counsel for ftie Respondent No.S/Caveater. The petitioner has prefe::3 this writ petition qnestionuig the vaMdity of the ordcr dated ^.0,9,2004 passcd by the Dii-cctor^ Geology & Mtauig, Chhattisgar^i, Raipur issuiag prom.otion orders of the Respondents No, 3 to 5 ^ad tlie correctaess of the Gradation List dated 22,5,2004 fixiag th^ seniorily offhe petitioner below fhe Respondente No. 3 to S, Leamed counsel for the was a.ppointed as Miaiag Insp^ he was not confirmed till 1981 petitioner subnuts fha.t fhe petitioner ;ctor in the year 1977 aiid since fhen 3. The Respondents No. 3 to 5 were promoted but the petitioner petitioner was regularly inakio.^ raismg Iiis grievaace regarding| appomted subsequent to fh^ petitioner aiid fhey have been has not yet been promoted, The representations siace fhe year 1986 liis seniority. The last representation XI-HC-22 ^T^T^T f<^ich -snt^T ^H\^ ^f^a Thakur &' ~3"S[ '^qFTRT'T, ^ft^FT?, fi«ns<iy 3ff^T tT^? :<^.;-?:.^:..^5.1/..?rc/o zl <%FF^ 200 /f^H j/ ./ WWIT^W^ •^^ST' -sn^r ^^n^T ^rft^T to fhis effect was made m the ye^i' 2004 but the respoiidents No, 1 and 2 have uot vet decided respondents be dtrected to d^cide the representation of the petitioner asid pass orders m. aco counsel for the State and Respon< dii'ected to decide fhe representa iii accordaiice with law withia a receipt of copy of this order, heariiig to the petitioner. With the direction aforesaid <=hl^toi<flrl TH^Tf^ Fs^ <M^l< ^srf^FT^^H^T ^iis representatiou, therefore, the ^rdao.ce wifh law, to which leamed [lent No.3 have no objectiou, Having heard leanied coun^el for the parties, havmg regai'd to fhc facts and circuinstances oftt|e casc, ia the opinion ofthis Cotirt the Uixiited prayer niadc by lcjarxied counsel for the petitioncr appears to be. reasonable. Tl|ierefore, the respondent No. 1 is |ion, if aay, raade by the petitioner ^eriod of 30 days froni fhe date of ^fter ajffordtGLg aa opportunily of I, fhe petition stands disposed of. Conseqiiently, M(W)P No. 2^59/2004 and I.A. No. 7167/2004 also staiid disposed of. Certified copy as per Rules. Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge [Tft^ ^fo^ ^'