9. S sf^s. S ?*• N6LE IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION FS1 N0. &8':1&/2QQ6 PETITIONER :- /-R.avindra Singh, aged 47 years, Son of Ravi Rajan Singh, Assistant Grade-I, Secretariat, Chhattisgarh Vidhan Sabha, R/o F-6, P.W.D. Colony, Kaier-a^Talab, Raipur, District Raipur [Chhattisgarh] VERSU^ RESPONDENTS ^rf- 1. Secretariat Chhattisgarh, Vidhan .^••'^S.-'' -- Sabha, Through- the Secretary, ^•'&SP ••""' Chhattisgarh Vidhan Sabha, Raipur, District Raipur [Chhattisgarh]. ^o-" ^t^" A^- -^ -,?s i-.'y" ^2-r Surendra Kumar Bhatham, Section Officer, Secretariat, Chhattisgarh Vidhan Sabha, Raipur [Chhattisgarh] y>* •"FiVsS'^",'^''' " 3; Keshar Singh Kanwar, Section ^^v^ »iii;Al .o.f:ti.ce1"'-?ecre^ariat/.-.9!1ha.<:tis9a.rt1 vx _-. .cnnn Vidhan Sabha, Raipur [Chhattisgarh] cfcE' 4, Rampal Kanwar, Section Officer, Secretariat, Chhattisgarh Vidhan Sabha, R.aipur [Chhattisgarh] WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE ^CONSTITUTIONOF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS. CERTIORARI AND /OR ANYOTHER SUITABLE WRIT OF LIKE NATURE. 9 :'a 1 . 'l. .'. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P. (S) No. 6898 of 2006 Petitioner Respondents Vcrsus Ravindra Siagh Secretariat Gtihattisgarh, Vidban SAha & othcrs Sla^e Bench : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Ag^Slwttt. Shri Sanjay K. Aganval, Advocate for thc pctitioncr. None for fhe respondents. ORDER (Passeri on this 23rd dsy of.Jannaiy, 2007) 1. The pefitioner had filed a writ petitfoa, eariier, being W. P. No. 2343 of 2005, chaUeiiging the promotun offhe respondents No. 2 to 4 herein, on the poat ofAssistaat Grade-I by order dated 30.1.2001. This Court afiter having noted the contention of the petitfoner, accepted the prayer of fhe pctitioner to the effect fhat a direction to fhe competent authority be Msued to decide fhe repicsentation of fhe petittoner wifhia stipulated period. This Ctourt vide orderdated 15.6.2005 (Annexurc P/12) djrected the respondent No.l herein to decule fhe representation within a perkid oftwo months fiiom the date of filing of ccrtified copy ofthc order along with a copy of the petition. 2. Accordmg to tearued counsel for the petitioner, the icspondent No. 1 faas ¥" not passed any order on fhe said representafion made by the pctitioner tiU date, fhat amounts to wiUul defiance of ttus Courfs oider. 3. It is furfher submitted by learued counsel appearing for fhe petitioner that the respondeut No. l has made further proinotions of fhe respondents No. 2 to 4 vide orier dated 19.10.2006. The petitioner has fited tfais petitfon iinpugning fhe order dated 30.1.2007 (Aruiexiuie P/7) and subsequent order dated 19.10.2006 (Annexure P/14), At fhis stage w B i'lBSSIi vm •-i-ai i •.S^ i •: |:;< E '.\ 1 .'.^ ISM 18!la s learaed counsel appearing for fhfi pctitioner confines his submission to issue a direction to fhe respondeat No.l, agata to consider the representation of fhe petitioaer wifh reganl to his promotion w.e.f. 30.1.2001 and subsequenfly w.e.f. 19.10.2006. 4. It appears that fhe respondent No. 1 has wiUfuDy afd intentfonally not couiptied wifh fhe earBer order dated 15.6.2005 passed by fhis Court in W. P. No. 2343/2005, which was dvQy conveyed t>y the petitioner on 30.6.2005 (Aimexure P/13). 5. In fhe facts and ciTcuinstances offhe case, fhe petitioner is pennitted to make a detailed representation to the respondent No. l for redressal of his grievance. The respondent No.l is acconlingly directed to consMcr and decide the representation of ttie petituner in accordance with law, on its own merit, by passing a reasoned order withia a period of 10 weeks from. the date of receipt of the representation, along wifh a copy of fhis order. Non-compliaace offhis Court's order may be viewed seriousfy. The petitioner is at liberty to file a petition, if grievance, as stated in the petitton stfll survives. 6. Wifh fhe above direction, this petition stands disposed of finaBy. No order as to costs. CertiB.eS'copy, as per Rules. Satish K.Agnihotri Judge Tlislair