IN TEE HIGH COURT OF mnwx-na‘mw-.m-—-muuw‘uwuu. m ‘I'I‘l‘IONER VwE R S“U~S .—Muum-—_ RE$PONDEN§IB mu—‘u—ul l“; state of $hhatt1sgarh thmugh the Secretary, . Forest Department, .K.s. Bhawan, Ra1pur. 2. Chief Conservator of Forest, Raipur?‘ Distt 3 Raipur (CG ) Conservator of Forest, SurQiija, Ambikapur, Distt g Surguja ( C G ) 4. Divisional Forest Offzcer, uth Suguja, Division : Pmblkapur, and Managing Dlregtor, South surguja, ZILA UNION, AMBIKAPUR, Distt : Snrguja ( C G ). 5. Shri Rameshwar Prasad Gond, Manager, LAGHUVAN SAMI‘I‘I rare, ' Range : Udaypur, District 2‘ Surguja C G )‘2 mIT PETITION UkDER N&TICIES 226/2 OF TI-E CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANE OF MRIT IN TEE NATURE OF CERTIORARI‘, WRIT DIRECTION V........u Em m—m-mw‘m-n—mwmuuwuu~~uu wumunu-un a“_u—-..~..u...-uu—. um-u—m~~uuunm—u.~nm THE PETITION DE; TAIIS OF im~~ewwM.—m._.~nmw~u.. u..- 1 1. Partlculars of the Pet 1tloner munnu‘u—e‘muuu‘m mu~--—”«-‘.~nm As mentioned above in t W (fK/K¢ £ CHHATTI$GARH AT BILASPUR Paras Ram Sahu, Son of late Shrl Bedram Sahu, aged about 58 years, posted as Deputy Ranger? Range Assistant Ktndri, C/o. Divisional Forest Bfficer, Marwahi Division, Pendra Road, resident of Kmdri, District : Bilaspur ( C‘fG. ) /, the cause title; WRIT PETITION 2%) 2003 mw‘m.—.uh—unguwuu XI—HC—22 3mm 13-02.2094 Shri V,K. Pandey, counsel for the petitioner. Advocata for ths StatE. Shri Ranbir Singh, G The patitioner has Article; 226/227 of the Co sijtution of India challengmg me 4 datgd 11.11.2003 wheréby respondent No.4 has orde d for recovery of Rs.2,000/- per month mam the salaly o 'the petitioner and order dated 20.09.2003 whereby the re very of Rs.1,000/ —per month from the salary of the petitioner 1as been ordered. Relevant orders are Annexme P-l 85 P-Q. Learned counSel for petitioner submits that the said recoveries have been order by respondent No.4 without giving Show cause notice to the titioner and without giving ariy opportunity of hearing or explaining the circumstances by the petitioner and further on the other hand respondent No.4 has issued a charge sheet to the petitioner and at the another hand Without completing the enquny respondent No.4 has ordered for recovery of the said amount. Therefore, learned counsel submits that the petitioner may be allowed to make a representation to respondent No.3 to which learned counsel for the respondent No.1 to 4 has no objeotion. Having heard the leaJned counsel for'the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of die case, the petitioner is allowed to make a detailed representation raising all his grievances within 15 days non) todav to respondent No 3 . mferred this Wxitv Petition undgr ordem of respondent o . e e ‘e Wm . WPgwé/a“) m m @3 mmm (1,) and in turn respondent No. 3 of the petitioner shall decide of 60 days fIDm the. date 0f : manner in accordance with th With me above directior in View of this: orde an'ng stand disposed of. \ Certified copy aS per rules: Sdl— .i Judge WW‘ wW $Wm" after considering all fhe grievances; the representation Within a period tceipt of the eame in an objective e law. s the petition Stands disposed of. No. 1 1,352/ 2003 for urgent he r, M.W.P.No.3499,i2003 & IVA L c.BHAD°° /: [wearea: