^i- JIIIIIINI.IIIIIIII lllll"*"-'- HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION fS) No. 410 of 2005 APPLICANT Suresh Kumar Pandey S/o Shri Kashi Prasad Pandey aged about 34 years^ Forest Guard^ Manpur Beat Rajnandgaon M.P. VERSUS RESPONDENTS : 1. State of M.P. through the Secretary Forest Department, M.P. Bhopal. 2. Chief Conservator ofForest, M.P. Bhopal. 3. Divisional Forest Offic^r, Forest Division (General) Rajnandgaon. 4. Shri Shiv Kumar Sahu S/o not known Forest Guard C/o D.F.O. Rajnandgaon. APPLICATION U/S 19 OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS ACT, 1985 SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K^Asnihotri, J. Present: Shri Parag Kotecha, Advocate for the applicant. Shri M.P.S. Bhatia, Deputy Government Advocate for the State/ respondents 1 to3. QRALQRDER (Passed on 25U1 day of February, 2009) With the consent ofthe parties, the matter is heard fmally. 1. The indisputable facts, as projected by the petitioner in this petition are that the petitioner was appointed and posted as Forest Guard by order dated 23.6.1977 (Annexure A) by the Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division Kawardha. The servlce career of the petitioner has throughout been unblemished without any adverse entry in the confidential reports. The petitioner had undergone training in the sixth session in the year 1984 and had obtained good grade in the test during the training period. Thereafter^ by order dated 02.12.1988, the petitioner was selected for training of Forester, however^the said list for sending the candidates for training of the Forester was cancelled. Thereafter, a fresh list was prepared wherein the name of the petitioner did not find place. The respondent No. 4, who is junior to the petitioner, alongwith others were sent for the training of forester. On the basis of training, the respondent ^ r ^": No. 4 was given the assignment of Forester without assignmg any reason. Thus., this petition impugns the order selecting the respondent No. 4 for training of Forester and placing the petitioner below the respondent No. 4 in the gradation list. In this petition^ the petitioner has neither questioned any specific order nor filed any llst which is sought to be quashed. Shri Bhatia^ leamed counsel appearing for the State/respondents 1 to 3 submits that the petitioner was sent for training on the post of Forester which he completed on 22.12.1992. The petitioner claims consideration ofhis case for promotion to the post ofForester. Shri Kotecha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation before the authorities in light ofthe judgment and order dated 8 January, 2007 passed in W.P.(S) No. 984 of 2005 (Bharat Lal Sinha & Others v. State ofM.P. (Now Chhattisgarh) and others). Learned counsel appearing for the State/respondents submits that he has no objection, if liberty is reserved to the petitioner to make a representation in the light of the order passed in the matter ofBharat Lal Sinha & Others (supra). In view of the foregoing, without deciding the case on merits, the petition is disposed of with liberty reserved to the petitioner to take recourse to any fomm, as stated above. No order asto costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Amit