.„._—„-„__._lte^l^^£. '^ 11^^ HI&E GOim'P ^GB' ME@Z& PMDESH ^ .TABAIiPIffi^ Wz-lt Betition XoMi^ of 1994. ' 7 l5aj3 Bihari ^harma.^o EambtoT^ —- £e<feitioner> Tei^is • •' ". •• ' '' ^ . ' '- •/ \ . . , - P res identf Speoial Area Developmaa'fe Authori-{y(SABA)GhirJLairi&otMe3?s —— ResDGzidents PBSIfIOI/l^SSS AB'EICISS 22& & 227 CE* ^HE ' GOMSSISm'IO^ ® . IHDI& J05 ISS'UI A %I2 1'S 2H33 iL^?UK@3 CBI, OSEe.I©R&5I»% 2 IB'S^ • &_AiSO:^OB .ISSUIM6 •S]30]gSSASS"DIIBC2ICMS ' l^ Pa:rticmla2^ ^ \^,; ^ • - .^^ • ..• . . : '. :•• .,-1_^, .',: S/o Sh2<i Saabhuvsai 2rig a-fchi, ogQ& a'bou-fc 51 yeaz's, Sarkarl Bafai Hao.u.man Haridir, £ost Oliiyiairi, Distric-b SuTgaj a (?€,?) ^^^ 2. Paybiea.iai's of tMe Respondenis < "i cou^ ij^^-^ ^L^.1^. 1- T--rQsi<ieii-fc^',' . , . • '"J-. : '••'::;.,,•! Speeial. Area DeTelopment Authority( SABA), ehii^i.miyi^; . . . V,' "_,' ' ^ • ' , ,' ^ Bis-fcz'ie-fctSi.i^^ja (%.^) : ^ ' . • ^....... ,' . .., . ;. ^ . ^ :. . -:^ ^ 2- Chi©?Bxee^iive ®?fice-E', lecial Are^ i^velapment AutIxbri'byC SL&SA), lir^irl, 2)istra,e1;Siirguja;(M«P) - r— HIGHCOURT OF CHHATTSSGARH AT BJLASPUR SinaleBench Hon'bte Shri H.L. Dattu. CJ. WnLPetition No. 4126 of 1994 PETITIONER Ram Bihari Sharma S/o Rambhuvan Tripathi versus RESPONDENTS President, Specia! Area Deveiopment Authority (SADA) Chirmiri & others Application under Article 215 ofthe Constitution of india read with Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act,. 1971. Present : Ms. Sharmila Singhai and Ms. Seema Saggar, counsei for the petitsoner. Shri Sanjay K Agrawai and Shri Sourabh Sahni, counsel for respondents. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 0781 SVIay, 2007) The petitioner was working on daily wage basis with the respondents. He is before this Court inter alia seeking a direction to the respondents to regularize his services on the post of Moharir and aiso to fix his pay scale at Rs.950/- i.e. at par with his juniors with effect from December 1992. (2) This Court vide order dated 04-03-1998 had directed the respondents to consider the petitioners case for regutarization in accordance v^ith the existing Rules and report the resuit of such consideratson. (3) Learned counsei for the respondents v^ouid submit that the respondents after considering the request of the petitioner has passed the order dated 01-05-1999 regularizing the ser^ices ofthe petitioner as Moharir. (4) in my opinion, the on!y request of the petitioner was to reguiarize the sen/ices of the petitloner on the post of Moharir, which according to the respondents has already been considered by the respondents. In that vievvf of the matter, for the present, nothing survives for consideration and decision of this Court and therefore, the petition requires to be disposed of and it is ^-^ disposed of. However, ifthe petitioner has any other grievance; he is at jjberty to make appropriate representation before the respondents. If and when such representation is made by the petitioner, the respondents shal! consider and decide the same in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- Chief Justice B i • <l