:.'e(- BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION No./?''^?/2006 b^ft Ranfil PETITIONER Ashwani Manikpuri, aged about 22 ye'ars, S/o. Late •B.D. Manikpuri, Jawahar Nagar, Durg (C.G.).. VERSUS RESPONDENTS State of through-the Department Chhattisgarh, Secretary, of Gene'ral Administration, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Mantralay, Raipur (C.G.) The Secretary, Government of Chhattisgarh, Department of Water Resources, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The Engineer-in-chief, Department of Water Resources, Raipur (C.G.) The Collector, Distt. Durg (C.G.) ' ' The Superintending -Engineer, Department of Water Resources Tandula Jal Sansadhan, District - Durg (C.G.). 6. The Sub Divisional'Officer, Department of Water < Resources Tandula Jal Sansadhan, Sub Division No.3, District Durg (C.G.) 7. The State of Madhya Pradesh ^ through -the Secretary, Department of General Administration, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal (M.P.) ^^—^ ]l Union of India, through the Chlef Secretary, Department Of Personal Training and Public Grieyances (State Reorganization Cell) Shastri Marg, New Delhi. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. XI-HC-2^ ^. W^N)D. P^'%JO£ •^3- "Vl 'SSIW3l;e?i 'j •iB-qra"tfltn | 3T(^i^«n®-ffiEa =?N?w-f 'WCT -cr is'a' '<rsRz!T ^" ^F^ S^ L. r ^ ^' 4° *-4.2006 ShriAshok Soai, Advocate for| ShriViaay Pandey, Panel Law}] Thakur Vijay Singh, Addl. SoU^ator Oeaeial for fhc Unton ®f llndia. With consent, heard finaUy. Thls ease relates to coinpass|oiiate appoiatmcat. Leamed 4ouasel for the petttioner stated fhajt petittoaer's fafha' who -wss -((roridng as Assistant Gtade II | in thc Water Rcsouroes ^epartmcnt died on 15-3-1999 i.^. after 1-11-1997 and not ^ariicr. It is further subxnitted that i^. batch ofcases bearii^ W.P. Ijlo. 1322/2002 involving the same ^>assed by fhis Cburt on 20/12/3<j>05. He piays that siinilar (tnlers niay be peisscd in this casc al^o, Leanied counscl for the State fect and states that the State of the petitioner. er, for the State. question oniers have beem docs not dispute. thc afcove Chhattisgarh has takea a 4ecision to consaler tfae cases of dependants of Qysae euiployees <(?ho dicd oa or ajfter 1/11/1997 st|ictly m accordaace with thc ^oVcy prevatent at that time. He [howevcr submits fhat four ijionths tiine for issuing necessaiy oi^lers may bc gwcn. In view of fhe subinissionsj madc by teamed counsel 4ppean»q[for the parties, without e^piiessiag any opinkin on tbe iberits of the case, ia thc opinion ^f this Court, ends ofjusticc ^iU be scrved if a du'ection is giwen 4ad the autlwrities coaceraed to ccatsider and decide the case of t^ie petitfoner in accordance with th^ poHcy prevatent at the time cjf death of the euiployee cpucesm^d. If fhc pctitfoncr fou»l ejl^ible, appointment orders wiU be ^rcferably withia 4 months firem thc copy of fbis order. The petitioner i^ also directcd to iiender due qo-opeiation to the aufhorities. With fhe aforesaid observalgons, fhls petidon stands (^isposed of. Cerdfied copy as per rutes. to titc State of Chhattisgarh I tesued as eaity as possible jdate ofpToduction/reccipt of Fakhruddin Judge [^tfe^