7^((Tc(~' yf IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.NO;3o°)_5 OF 2003. PETITIONER / ^*:^^^ ^yy^ ;"-£s(^' ^»e' Alfr- ,& R. K.Chaturvedi, S/o Shri Bhagwan Das, Aged about 4ffyea.rs, Sub Engineer, Irrigation Department, at Left Bank Canal Sub Division No.4, Seoni Champa,(C.G.) and permanent Resident of Badamalahara, District Chhatarpur, (M.P.) VER S U S ./\ RESPONDENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through; The Secretary, Irrigation Department, D.K.S. Bhawant, Raipur, (C.G.) 2. State of Madhya Pradesh, Through ;- The Additional Secretary, Irrigation Department, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal (M.P.) 3. Union of India Through; The Director, Department of personnel and training publicgrievances and pension, Room No.312, Lok Nayak Bhawan, 3rd Floor, Khan Market, (State Re- 11; ^.Organisation Cell) Khan Markef New •+ . .• Delhi. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE INDIA HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURECHHATnSGARH: BILA8PUR Slagle Bench": Hoa'ble Shri Satish K. Agnlhotrl, J. W. P. No. 309S OF 2003 Petitioner : R.K. Chaturvedi. Versus Respondents : State ofC.G, aad others Shri Rakesh Mohan Paadey, aiunsel for fhe petitioner. Shri Alok Bakshi, Govt. AdvocateforState/respondentNo.l. Shri V.C. Ottahvar, couasel for respondent No.2. Shri S.K. Beriwal, couiisel for respondent No.S/Union of India. ORAL_ORD]BR (218t Febraary, 2006) 1. The petitioner was einployed as Sub Engineer, in Irrigation Departiaent, Ainbikapur, (C.G.), thereafter, the petitioner was transferred to Imgation Division Tikamgara (M.P.) and fhereafter the petitioner was agarn traasferred to Water Resources Division Nowgong, Distriet Chhatarpur, (M.P.) 2. By order dated 16.9.2002, the petitioner has been aBocated to fhe State of Chhattisgarh, contraiy to his option. The petttioncr beiag resident of ViUage Badainalahara, District i Chliatarpur, (M.P.) waats his reallocation to the State pf i Madhya Pradesh. 3. Leanied counsel for fhe petitioner subinits fhat the petitioner was attbcated to fheState of Chhattisgarh vide order dated 16.9.2002, the petitioner waats to jnake a representation to| the respondents/aufhorities for consideriug his case for] reaUocation to the State ofMadhya Pradesh, to which leaiTied counsel for the respondents have no objeetion. ti'l :;; x^. 4. In \dew offoregoiag, the petitioner is gi-anted liberty to niake a representation before the concemed authorities. The concemed auttiorities are accordiagly du'ected to consider aiid decide the representation, if any, aad to pass order tn accondaace wifh law, within a period of eight weeks froin the date ofreceiptofrepresentation. 5. Inyiew ofthe above, fhe writ petition staads disposed of No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish'K;;Agiuhotri Judge c^^^