IN THEHIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BIL^PCR WRIT PETITION N0. _.L1-62—/2004/ PETmQNER 'Jiteadra Kumar Sahu, S/o Late Shri ManrakhanSahu, aged 28 years, Occupation-Nil,r/o Village Byragaoa, Post Bliiragaon, TahsttBhanupratappur, DistrictKanker(C.G.) -VERSUS- RESPQNDENTS *.•• c^^f •^5^ y^^ ^>'^"\'s'" 1 - ^ ^ li?:^ Es te^'' ift K^ ^ r.P.1 •\ 3u'£' ;.^i ^ llt*"' :pre[ ^^:^ i^i-.-^^.' iiS^ 1. StateofChhattisgarhthrough Principal Secretary, Departmeat ofHealth & Family Welfare, D.K.S.Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Director,Health Services, Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Collector,Bastar at Jagdalpur 4. ChiefMedicat & HealthOfficer, Bastar at Jagdalpur (C.G.) 5. AssistaDtCommissioner.Tribal Development, Jagdalpur (C.G.) 6. Block Education Officer, Tribal Development Department, Charama, DistrictKanker (C.Cr.) 7, BlockMedicalOfficer,Primary Healtlt Centre, Pharasgaon, District Bastar (C.G.) WRIT VNDER ARTICLE 226/22f7 OF THE GONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A SUITABLE WRIT.OaDERS ORDIKEGTION. The abovs named petitioner most humbly and respectfully begs to submit as under: - 1. PARTICULARSOF THEPETITIONER{S): As per the cause title. 2. TARTICULARS OFTHERESPONDENTfS): As per the cause titte. /** -<^^ [M X HIGH GOURT OF JiroiCATViaG CHHATnSQARH: BILAdBPUR Slnj^e Bench: Hon'fele ShriSatislt K. AgaUioferl, J. W. P. Wo, 1.162 of 2004 Ptetitioner : Jitendia Kumar Sahu Versus Respondent : State ofChhattisgarh & otfaers Shri todrascn Sahu, Advocate for fhe petitioner. Siat. Anju Ahuja, Depuly Govt. Advocate for the respondents. ORDER (28ta August, 2006] 1. The father of the petitioner namety Shri Maatakhan Sahu was worldng as Teacher when he died on 9.2.1979 in hamess. The pctitioner moved an application for compassioaate appoiatment which was forwarded by tfae respondent No.6 to the respondent No.5 for appomtiag him on compassionate ground by letter dated 24.8.19% (Annexiune P/l). The petitioner was appointed as Miiltipurpose Health Worker on coinpassionate basM on 201il Jaauaiy, 2000 (Annexure P/3) and posted at Scctfon Deogaon, Priinaiy Health Center, Farasgaoa. Having conie to know fhat fhere was no provision fi>r coiapassionate appointment during the period fix>m 1.1.2000 to 31.12.2000, fhe appointment of the petitioner as Multipurpose Health Worker on coiupassioaate basis was canceUed vide oxdcr dated 8.2.2000 (Aanexure P/6). The petitkiner has fited fhis petition im.pu@MDg the said orter dated 8.2.2000. 2. At this stage, leamed counsel appearii^ for the petitioner, on instruction, submits that fhe petitioner does not want t0 press fhis 1 petition, however, fhe petitioner be graated Uberfy ^f) make a represeatation before fhe concemed authbrity for consideration bfhis case on conipassionate basis, to which leamed counsel for the respondents have no objectfon. 3. The petitioa is accordii^ly disiiussed as •witbdrawn wifh the above stated liberiy. On such representation beiiig xnade by the petitioner, the concemed aufhori<y inay consider and decide, in accordance with law, within a reasonable period. No order as to costs. SA'- Satish K. Agaihotri Judge