a> ?'KV^^?&s£ sSS^^^vjf •ha ^^v&'^^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATraSGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.(S) N0. ^6^OF 2010 WRFT PETITEON UNbER ARTICLE 226. CONSTITUTION OF INblA Petitioner Ram Kumar Verma, S/o Shri Malkham Verma, aged about 54 years, R/o Village Kachandar, P.0. Karanja, Bhilai, Tehsil and Distt. Durg (Chhattisgarh) Versus Respondents o ..•• ^Qy- -\ v .-i; //^A' '.-•"^•^.. /)<;^-€,^^ ..**" ^-A ^''- ^.y^ t^ ^••" ;•-< ;3o 1. Bharatiya Ispat Pradhikaran, Sale Refractory Unit, through The General Manager, Sale Refractory Unit, Maroda, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (Chhatfisgarh) ^' 2. The PersonnelManager, Sale Refractory Unit, Maroda, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (Chhattisgarh) 3T1^5TqiI Cw'k sn^i ^*-ii^ "Hfia ~s^ '^TORra, ^•(ilwiii. faciwy S^ TRRR 1WII VhWSh U:^1M^^ f^sr' sn^iwiw^ifei Sg ; HON'BLE MR. JUSTICB PRITIltKBR DIWAKE8 03.12.3010 Shri Sanjay Shyam Agrawal, Dr. N.K.ShuklaSr. Counsel Shukia present in the Court isj behalf of the respondents. c|?unseS for the petitioner. as^isted by Shri Shailendra Idirecteci to accept notfce onj dateM EO-jd The Simited grievance of the p^t that vide judgment and order petitioner was convicted for the off{ 450, 506-11 and 376 of the SPC removed from service vide order dateiB Contention of Shri Agrawal, videjudgment and order dated 14.9.'3 (Annexure P/7(, the petitioner hasj therefore he is entitied for his reins( the petitioner haa approached tbe 20.10.2010 (Annexure P/9), the autit to submit a copy of the judgment the trial Court. He submits thatl acquitted by the High Court, there look into the judgment and order and the authorities should have reinstating the petitioner. Counsel appearing for the authorities have asked for certain not hesitate in submitting the sam^ consider all the aspects of the ca^f accordance with law. arjd «bwici4-ftiiticfl'?feA<R>i^it ^3TP(PT3)I^I i^titioner in the present petition is 20.09.93 (Annexure P/5) the tnce punishable under Sections as a resuit of which he was 23.12.93 (Annexure P/6), 4ounsel for the petitioner is that ^010 pasaed in Cr.A. N0. 935/93 been acquitted honorably and latement. He submits that when aliithorities of the resoondents on ^orities have asked the petitioner order dated 20.9.93 passed by onee the petitioner has been [s no need for the authorities to 20.09.93 of the trial Court Ipassed the order immediately r^spondents submits that if the 4ocuments the oetitioner should and it is for the authorities to and then to take decision in V. ^ ^tI.HC-22 ^5[ -l|Wlc|i'LI, Si'Tfly'lli. faWKI^t STI^?T 'VS^SK Wqp(Tsh11<*i "WI. 200 Isre^T' an^nsfii &-ii<* siiisi 'sPTOT'gitH sii^i'RaiWBto petiUoijier Be that as it may, the judgments i.e. the judgment of th^ Court before the competent authoril from today and in tum the competet order in .accordance with law within a further period of one monthl The petition is accordingly dis >mpete(it considerin jier is directed to submit both the trial Court as well as the High |y within a period of three weeks authority wili pass appropriate fering all the aspects of the case bosed of. wiferat'i wwTi •? fe<A d3R5R ^T SlfStIH 3D^f Sd/- Pritinker Diwakar Judge -^^ •^7^j