€ swag: @E§ém ® gggy ‘ "% IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARH) w.P. (S) No. (RV) /2010 i 3s PETITIONER : / Naresh Nirmalkar, S/o. Shri Dular Singh Nirmalkar, aged about 36 years, R/o. Mukam 86 Post — Keregaon, Tahsil — Nagri, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS / (1) State of Chhattisgarh through its Secretary, Department of Forest, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.)' /,, (2) Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division (Samanya), Dhamtari, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) Depot Officer, office of Depot Officer (forest), Nagri, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) WRIT PETITIONUNDER ARTICLE 226 THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA / fr XI—HC-22 3m mm ..... m Ng‘gm‘D‘jlm 6° m 2 mmmm 8.3.: HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. PRI’I 09-12-2010: WWdWW smarter ‘INKER DIWAKER Shxi Vinod Deshmukh, comma} far the petitionar. Smt. Smifa Ghai, P.L. for thc Grievance of the patitioner in though he is sntitled for his rcgulal Guaxd, hc has bsexx mgularizcd on 1 Counsel for the petitioner su have completed all the formalities fr favour of the petitioner and therefo: may be yermitted to withdraw the to $e a fresh representation befo] same may be directed to be decide expeditiously as possible. Counsel for the State submi the fact he cannot make any SU Government is wining to regularize on the post of Forest Guaxd or objection if the petitioner makes authority concerned and the s accordance with lavy‘ f Accordingly, the petition is that in the event of any represeni before respondent No.2 raising k State. the present petition is that ization on the post of Forest he post ofwatchman. bmits that the respondents r passing necessary order in e at this stage the petitioner present petition with liberty e respondent No.2 and the d in accordance with law as ts that without ascertaining tement whether the State the services of the petitioner not. However, he has no a representation before the ame is decided by it in iisposed of with a direction ah'on filed by the petitioner Lis grievances, the same is We after v s Wm WW W 2 m mmmw‘a WW WW $Wm he authority concerned in sly as possible. expected to be decided by t accordance with law as expeditiou It is made clear that this ¢ opinion on merits of the case z would be at liberty to decide the n strictly in accordance with law. Sourt as not expressed any md the authority concerned :presentation of the petitioner Sdl- Pritinker Diwaker Judge {113?} ‘éf@?} h