c^. IN THE HON'BLE HlGH COIJRT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR fC.G.l WRIT PETITION fS.Il N0^ 3'9^° /2011 PETITIONER RESPQNDENTS / Singl®B«nch : Sudan Prasad Bhartiya, aged about 58 years, son of Late Sri Mahabir, at present working as a "Forester" Forest Division Sukma, District Dantewada (C.G.) VERSUS 1. Stateof Chhattisgarh, Through : The Secretary, Forest Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Chief Conservator of Forests, Forest Department of the State of Chhattisgarh, Jail Road, Raipur, (C.G.) Conservator of Forests, Jagdalpur Division, Jagdalpur, District Baster (C.G.) Divisional Forest Officer, Sukma Forest Division Sukma, District Dantewada (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRITOR MANDAMUS/ CERTIORARI. ORDER/ ORDERS. DJRECTION/ DIRECTIONS ETC. .-.A^ 2. ^<^^ " ^s^ /^w ^y^ 3. 4. 1. 2. PARTICULARS OF TUE PETITIONER :- ^. As mentioned above in the cause title. PARTICULARS OF THE RESPONDENTS :- As mentioned above in the cause title. <t;A >s -^.-•^' .SP-; .^A- y <'> HIGH COURT OP CHHATFISeARH AT BILASPUR SB : HOB'BLE MR. JUSTICB PRTTSNKBR DIWAKBR W.P.jSI.NO. 3940/2011 Sudaa Prasad Bhartiya versus State ofChhattisRarh & Others Shri Visiinu Koshta, counsel for fhe petitloner. Shri Praveen Das, Dy. G.A. for the State. WRIT PETITION UNDBR ARTICLE 326 OF THB CCTiSTITU'raON OF INDIA ORDER (22.07.2011) Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 24.6.2011 passed by fhe resp. No.4 as a discipBnaiy aufhority imposing inajor penally upon the petitioner ofreduction ia raafc. Shri Koshta submits fhat though in normal course, the appeal is avaOable for fhe petitioner to chaUeage the order passed by the respondent N0.4 but as in the present case, fhe appeUate aufhority i.e. resp. No.3 himselflias iaterfered and has issued some diTection, fhe petitioner apprehends that his appeal may not be decided by tbe resp. N0.3 in a fair inanneT. Shri Das, counsel for fhe respondents subinits tfaat there is absolutely no rcason for fhe resp. No.3 to bave any prejudice against the petitioner aad he iu aB faimess wfll decide tfae appeal of the petitioner if so preferred. At tbis stage, Shri Kostita submits fhat he may be penaitted to withdraw this petition with .liberly to ffle the appeal before resp. No.3 aad diFection may be issued to tfae resp. N0.3 for deciding his appeal expeditiously. Accordingfy, fhe petitioner is penmtted to withdiaw fhis petition with the aforesaid Mberty. In tfae eventuality of fittug aay appeal by the petitioner wifti in a week fi'oin tfae date of receipt of cQpy of this order, it is expected from fhe appeUate aufhonty to decide the saiae as expeditiously as .possible preferably within a period of two monfhs from fhc date of receipt of copy of the said appeal. Needless to state that whfle deciding fhe appeal, resp.No.3 wfll not cany any prejudice against fhe petitioner and will decide the appeal on its own merits ia accordance with law. In view of above, the petition is disxnissed as withdrawn vrifb the liberty as aforesaid. It fa m.ade clear fhat fhis Court Uas not expressed aay opinion on luerits ofthe case and the authority concemed would be at liberly to decide fhe sanie ni accordance with law. Sd/- pritinker Diwakar Judge