^^ HIGH COURT OF OBEHATTISGARHAT BILASPUR PETITIONER 'SESPONDENTS •^p '• :Writ^PetitM>n:?»o.'?43of2006 ! ' ,''; •";::'•:•.' VinayKiimar Mishra, SA> Late Dr. M.L. Mishra, Agetl aboitt 51 yeara, Deputy Director, Directorate ofGeology and Minirig, Clihattisgarii, Raipur. VERSUS ' ., 1. Uiiion of India Tlirough tiie Secretary, Department of Personnel, Publie Grieyance and Pension, ThirdEloor, Lok Nayak Bhawaii, Khan Market, New Dellii. 2. State ofChhattisgarh tfarough tfae Secretary, Departmeirt of Miiieral Resources, DKS Building, Mantralaya, Raipiir, Chhattisgarh. 3. State of Madliya Pradesh, Tlirougfa the Seeretary, Department of Mmeral Resources, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal (MP). 4. Shailendra Trivedi, Joiat Director/Superiiitsnding Geologist, Directorate of Qeology and Mhiiiig, Raipur (CG). (WRTT PETmONUNDES- ARTICLE 226/227 OF Ttffi CONSTTTUTION OF: (SB: Hon'ble Mr. Satfsh K. Agmhotri, J.) Sliri P.S. Koshy, Advocate for the petitioner. tol. No.2. Shri S.S.Rajput, AdvocatefortherespondentNo. 3. Sliri Prafiill Bharat, Advocatefor therespondentNo. 4. ORALORDER s (Passed on2SW ofFebruaiy, 2 8) The petitioner, by this petition, seeks following reliefs: "i. 11. That, respondents may kiiidly be directed by writ of maildanius to fortfawith produce tiie entire records, for perosal before this Hon'ble Court. That, this Hoii'ble Cdurt may kiiidly be pleased to direct Ihe respondent autliorities to make necessary corrections iii the gradation lists dated 01.Q4.2003, 01.04.2004 and 01.04.2005 (Aniiexure P/l) prepared by the Departmeiit of Mineral Regources, State of Clihattisgarii, on the basis judginent of Hoatile Higli Court of Madhya Pradesh iii the case ofA-M. Vivarekar S/o M.A. Vivrekar (Writ Petition No. 7700/03) before consideration ofthe matter oftlie promotion totfae post ofAdditionaI Director. ^~s ::<s. ^' /-*^iK- 6. 'Wi!SSS^ ^- iii; Thafc.tlMsHoiAleCourtinayfurtherbepleasedt&pas^flny^h other order, issue any such writ or directioa in favour oftBe s petitioaer and againstthe respondents as it may deem fit aad proper under the facts and eircimistancesofthe cases witli eosts." ; Leanied counsel appeariiig for the petitioher submits that reliefclause No. (ii) is the mam praver and he does not want to press other relief Shri S.K. Beriwal, leamed Staading Counsel for respondent No. 1, Sliri Viiiay Harit, leamed Deputy Advocate General for tlie respondent No. 2, Shri S.S. Rajput, leamed counsel for die respondeiit No. 3 and Shri Prafiill Blmrat, leamed coiinsel for the respoadeiitNo. 4,jouitly submit that the gradation listsdated 01.04.2003, 01.04.2004 aud 01.04.2005 (Aimexure P/l) was not prepared by the State of Madliya Pradesh aiid tlie Union of India has no role in preparation of the gradation Usts. Shri Vinay Harit, leamed Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the StateofGhhattisgarh/respondeatNo. 2, submits tliat he has no objection ifthe State-authority is directed to considerthe ease ofthe petitioner in making necessary correctioa in the gradation lists dated 11.04.2003, 01.04.2004 and 01.04.2005 (Annexiire P/l) m li^it ofthe judgnetit and order dated 14.12.2005 passed in W.P. No. 7700/03 (A.M Vivarekar Vs. Tlie State ofMadhya Pradesh & others). Without expressiiig any opinion on merit ofthe case, as well as applicability ofthe case ofA-M. Vivarekar Vs. The State ofMadfaya Pradesh & others (Supra) to the facts ofthe case, this petition staads disposedQf. The respondents may coiisider not to hold D.P.C. before taking decision as stated above. Tlis petitionerig at liberty to point out any otfaerjudgmentrelevanttotliedigputesinvolvedmtlugcase. Iiiterimreliefgranted earlier stands discharged. Sahu Sd/- SatishK.Agnih»trl Judge