C -u . IL'1 iars' ;F%£ •B««*%^i 003 ULJTHE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition N0. tio ~T 72006 •to-n' Service matter PETITIONER ^•••6yl' /Dasrath Singh ';•• ..^•^ ..•" x^f^ ^'Y^^- .^"/•' &»•• ^^- y ^•y -v-;" RESPONDENTS /l (^ O^p Aged about 36 years S/o. late Shri Nemsingh Working as Waterman Aadivasi Kanya Post Matric Chhatrawas, Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Schedule Tribe, Schedule Caste, OBC& Minority Welfare & Development Mantralaya D.K.S. y ^~' .-,_-'A<i. Bhawan, Raipur(C.G.) •<;y / - ^~ ^^ ~"~ '"""' •^^^~ ^- c^vs^ ^^" v^ \0"" 3. 4. Commissioner Tribal Welfare & Development Raipur (C.G.) The Collector (Tribal Welfare Development) District Bilaspur (C.G.) Assistant Commissioner (Tribal Welfare Development) District Bilaspur (C.G.) ^' WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227LQF CQNSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS. CERTIORARI AND FOR QTHER^SUITABLE WRIT OR WRITS ORDEROR ORDERS DIRECTIOJ<_O^D!RECTIONS. 029 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WritPetitipnNo. 1167 of 2006 Bablu Petitioner Vcrsus Respondents Dashrath Siagh Statc ofChhattisgarh & othera Sin^e Beach: HonTitle Mr. Justice Satish K. Affnlhotri. Shri Goutam Khetrapal, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Sushfl Dubey, Govenunent Advocate for the respondents/ State. ORAL ORDER (25th March, 2006) 1. In this petition, fhe petitioner seeks awrit ia the nature ofiaandamus commanding the respondeuts to miplenient the benefit of the revised 5dl pay scale w.e.f. 1.1.1996 with interest. 2. Leamed counsel for fhe petitioner submits fhat the petitioner has already made representation fhrough union to respondent No. 2. Learaed counsel coiifincs his prayer to consideration of the petitioner's representation already made tluough union to respondent No. 2. 3. Leamcd counsel appeariag for fhe respondents have no objectioa. 4. Accordiugty, respoudent No. 2 is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner, if any, within a period of four weeks fiTQin fhe date of receipt/production of a copy of this order in accordauce wifh law. 5. For fhe reasons stated above, the petitionstands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge