%/ c^u<^ IN THE HEGff COURT OF JVDICATURE CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.NO. 2-3 I / 2904 / Petitioner ...-•^ *•' ..•• •-•"'=.\\<'k':;l^-"" ^:^yr^-r-" ,^y- ^•-y o' Versus c^- ^' Rohit Ranjan Tiwari S/olPramod Raiyaa. Tiwari, aged^ about 24 years, Near Noiva Office Nearby Mahamaya Agency, Warehouse Road, Bilaspur-(C.G.) Respondeafs I. s^iflg^ •'xSB ^y^^ ^t.0 ^ G- 2. ^^^¥ '^^L'S^ State ofCyiattisgarh througti fhe Principal Secrefary Departmenf of OeneralAdministration Mantralaya, DKS Bhawan, Raipur-(C.G.) The Seeretary Department of teigation and Water Resourees, DKS Bhawan, Maatralaya, Raipur, Dist; Raipur-(C.G.) WRIT PETFTION UNBER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WMTS OF MANBAMUS / CERTERIORt OR ANY OTHER. OR PROPER DmECTION& AND ORDERS sn^i^i fS'rftF 311^1 ^q ^lfifl : •• ;;t- T°? •^ll^lcd, aifll^'is, ftfiiuy wqnTwrw...M..f...s.a.i..^............ sn^i^areT^rftB Sliri Anand K TTivaii. c 3hri Rajibir Singh, Goi) The petitiouer has prefj 8s 227 of tlie Constitution <t respondents be dirccted to appouitinent on conipassion^ Tlie circuinstaiices unil was working as Scnior Stend Department of Irrigation Del hsu-ness on 01.03.2001 at a^ caraiQg incaibcr in the fami| as. old ladv aad the onlv / fherefore, fhe petitioner beni; before ttie respoi^de appouitment on coiapassion^.te cffcct was filcd as Arm.cxurd consldered by the respouden| in Coiniuerce aad is elli coinpassionate ground. Leained couasel for petitioner inay be aUozved to respondent No.l aad res] the case of the petitioner ground, to which leamed Sta^ <<>wf<'i41-f fHi-S 4 fe^t <("]<<!< •^aifimsn^i bunsel for tlie petitioner. 1't. Adv. for the State. ^rred thls petition under Article 226 >f india seekmg dit'ection tliat the c^llsider the case of fhe petitioner for tte eround. fle'r w-hich fhc "etitioner has forced a^e that the petitioner's father, who ^1'apher iii Hasdeo Baiigo Pariyojna (aartment District Bflaspur died iti fee of 53 vears aad he was tlie oiilv |y. Thc inothcr of fhe pctitioucr is bjnfher of the petitioner is stiideut, tlie youngest child of the deceased o+dent No.l on 23.03.2001 for ^round ajnd application to fhat P-1 but fhe same has not becn .|;s. The petitiouer is Post Graduate ^gible for tlie appointment on the petitioner subinits that tlie lEiake a detailed representatiou to porjdent No.l be directed to consider appointment on compassionate (e couiisel has no objection^ fj)r c ^i'? ^-5T "'jl^ld^, 0-rtlys, ^ciwy ..^..P.....S:.S..':.\..-....-..—-- sii^i-q^r (^rt^?) wtM^ wwff ^ ft^"^"5R ^TSffiCTSII^I an^rqnliFiN; 'CTT sn^ff ^b4i4> iR<nW8to3ii^[ Havins heard the leamel I counsel for the parties and liavine regard to fhe facts and ircuinstaiices of the case, the petitioncr is aUowed to inak a dclaiicd rcprcscntation to respondeut No. 1 alon th rclevant documents consideration of the appointme4t oa the compassionate gixiund and in tum respondent No. 1 af r consideruig tbe orders, rules aad circulars regarding fhe co^npassionate apponittnent shaU decide fhc represeutation withirj a pcriod of 60 days froin thc date of receipt of fhe same in aa objective manner iu acconlance wifh the law. Witb the above dtrections tfie petition staads disposed of. Certified copy as per rulei Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge