^^s:^ ~l ^ IN THE fflGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR W.P.No.J-ol&7of2002 R.C. DUBEY, SON OF LATE N.P. DUBEY, AGED 55 YEARS R/0. HIG 1/7 SECTOR-3, PANDIT DEEN DAYAL UPADHYAY NAGAR, DANGANIA, RAIPUR. PETITIONER VERSUS THE CHHATTISGARH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD A STATUTORY BODY CONSTITUTED UNDER THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE INDIAN ELECTRICITY ACT THROUGH THE SECRETARY, DANGANIA, RAIPUR. THE MADHYA PRADESH ELECTRICITY BOARD A STATUTORY BODY CONSTITUTED UNDER TH^.^ RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF ,- THE ELECTRICITY ACT ; THROUGH THE SECRETARY, SHAKTI NAGAR, RAMPUR, JABALPUR. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR THE ISSUANCE OF WRITS IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS. AND/OR ORDER(S). AND/OR DIRECTIONfS) m THE NATURE OF WRITS ^.^ ^:%$>1 '/^lrt>" RESPONDENTS XI-HC-22 371^1-^T f^T°F31T^T -^HJ^"^f^[ + ^^F '^fPTF^FI, ^•ai^^!<o, R<rst^5^< 'WH^II'^W^ ___.(^f...t^?.'. •M 2^ ^IT^T ^clTW ^rft^ 03-02-2003- Shri B.P. Sharaia, counsel Heard. The prayer ia this writ ^ opposite party to give seniority to| appomtinent on /regulai' post benefits arismg ttierefrom. How^ver is fairly stated by leamed couns^l of ttie aufh.orities he haa submltt^ conceraed aufhorifr for considl thi^ Court for relicf, Accordingl^ fhe aufhority to consider his repr^sentation. In tlie above view of fhe it is disposed of by directiag tihii ^t^feF^T ^i^<vff ^ f^^3 <fa^$R ^" 3?P<T^ 3?ii^r br the petitioner. ^titiou is for a direction to the tlie petitioner from the date ofhis togetihLer wifh. all consequential tver, when the niatter is called, it fhat aggrieved wifh. the maction ?d a detailed rcpresentation to the 'ration of his case bzit as ffaie aufhLority did not pay aay hccd tt|ereto, he was obUgcd to approach , fhe praycr is for a dircction to inatter, the Court feels tliat no useful purpose would be servejd ia keepiag fhis writ petition pendiag, as fhe saine caii be disp^sed ofat this stage. Accordiiigly, respondent No, 1- Chhattisgarh State Electdcity Board to considfer and dispose of the petitioner's representation ^vitliin a period cjf twelve weeks froni the date of T 3?T§^r'q?^( ^lt^^lT ) (^-P /'W>/^L 3qr?^l^T f<-lioh 3Ti^T ^^N^ ^f^ ^I^T ^<ff^R ^fe? ^NoT^T "^PR^ff ^* 1^1 Tf^f^^K ^'^I^T^n^T coniniunication / receipt of thi^ order. It is made cleai' that the Court is not expressing any opinjion on the raerits of the contention raised, which wiU have to be Board ou its own nierits aad regulations aad guideUnes goven) Consequently I.A. No,34^ |staad disposed of. Ceitified copy as per Rule^ cc|nsidered by the respondent No, ^. m accordaace with the niles, sn(iiag the field. ^7/2002 for urgent heaiiag also Sd/- P.C. Naik Judge .<?-^ l,