^- vzrzr/' (^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR NO. VV-"/2011 OSMR^ E Bl W.P. (S) No. 1,1P! ^: PETITIONER .'^^ .Z<r.''"'V^ ^•^y w ^<i>-y\ n^<;'%v V^S^D- .•f'-JK>,'7.--' ^ :^/ pi\> - ^ .*' ''-"^.y .tii-'" RESPONDENTS 1. Dr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, S/o. Shri S. P. Garhewal: aged about 43 years, working as Lecto-trer, Chhattisgarh Institute of Medical Science (CIMS), R/o. Qurt. No.H-2/150, Narmada Nagar, Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS The State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary Department of Health 85 Family Welfare, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur(CG) \^ Director, Medical Education, State of Chhattisgarh D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG) Dean, Chhattisgarh Institute of Medical Science (CIMS), Bilaspur (CG) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA The petitioner above. named, respectfully beg to submit as under:- 1. PARTICULARS OFTHE PETITIONERfS) : Asshown in the cause title. dA-i Gowri ^HIGHGOURTOFCHHATnSGARH:BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0. 1137 OF 2011 PETITIONER Dr. Bhanu Pratap Singh Versus RESPONDENT The State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition under Article 226 ofthe Constitutiori of India) Single Bench : Hon'bleShri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present;- Shri P.S. Koshy, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Ajit Singh, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORDER (ORAU (Passed on this 28"' day of February, 2011) 1. Heard learned counsel fprthe parties. . 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the respondent authorities despite being a clear direction by this Court in Dr. Bhanu Pratap Singh v. The Stateof Chhattisgarh & Others , nothing has happened till date except payment of arrears and the respondent authorities are proceeding with filling yp the post of Professor in Pathology. 3. Learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State submits that the appropriate direction has already been issued to the Director, Medical Education and Dean, CIMS, Bilaspur, on 6-12-2010, but nothing has happened. Learned counselsubmits that CIMS, Bjlaspur.thoughit is an autonomous body, but it is fully regulated and funded by the State Government. 4. In view of foregoing, there is no reason asto why the State Government is helpless in getting the order passed by this Court implemented. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to implement the order dated 30-3-2010 as early as possibte preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copyofthisorder. 5. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- Judge 1 WP No.657 of200^.(decided on 30-3-2010) ^M-