i'? '"•- w IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT^ILASPUR CHHAmSGARH WRIT PETITION No. l (63^2006 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS: ../^/ 9.--'^>?-''- ..••'" r¥"R)^..- / ^y\.^y X^sf^O*" -*'' -c?" . f o'®'.&-'' "^' t-<s" L^i r*^\&1 ?y \l^\~^f ^^^ S.R. Seii S/o. Late H.R. Sen (Deputy Ranger), (3TT cToT ^srqTc'T) Aged about- 58 years, R/o. Behind Hanuman Mandir, Sanjay Nagar, Ward No.-3, Baloda Bazar, District- Raipur (C.G.). VERSUS " 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Secretary, Forest Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.). 2. Divisional Forest Officer, Raipur Forest Division Raipur (General). District- Raipur (C.G.). /' 3. Conservator of Forest, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.). /4. The Rang Officer, Baloda Bazar Range, (General), District- Raipur (C.G.). 5. The Deputy Ranger Officer, Rohausi, Baloda Bazar Range District- Raipur (C.G.). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. SheetZ '^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATnSGARH AT BILASPUR Wntfetition No.JJ69 of 2006 Petitioner S.R. Sen ^ Versus Rcspondents ; State of Chhattisgarh & ofhers Sfai^le Benclt: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agaihotri. Shri Pushpendra Patel, couasel for fhe petitioner. Shri Sushit Dubey, Govenuneat Advocate for the respondents/ State. Bablu ORAL ORDER (25^ March, 2006) Leamed couasel for the pctitioner submits that the petitioner has xnade two representations dated 2.1.2006 (Armcxure P/2) and 7.2.2006 (Annexurc P/3) to fhe respondeat No. 2 for coinpliance of the order dated 7.12.2005 (Aimexure P/1) passed by the respondent No, 2. Accorduig to leanied counsel for the petitioner, the respondent No. 2 has not paid any heed to hfe representations and despite fhe order dated 7.12.2005, fhe petitioner has not been permitted to take the charge as Asstetaat Deputy Ranger, Ofiice Rohausi, Baloda Bazar Range, to which learaed counsel for fhe respondents have no objectkin. The respondent No. 2 is directed to pass order on the represeutations dated 2.1.2006 (Annexure P/2) and 7.2.2006 (Annexure P/3) to ensure the compliauce offhe order dated 7.12.2005. In view ofthe foregoing, the writ petitiou stands disposed o£ No order as to costs. — Satish K. Agnihotri Judge