CD !NJ-HEHLGHCOURTOFJUDICATUREATBILASPUR(C.G.) W.P.No.^/S' I 200f ss PETITIONER Ramhaiya Lal Shrivas S/o Shri Nanhuram Shrivas A^e./ig yewi R/o Behind State Bank, Pendra, P.0. & Tah. Pendra Road, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS ...••^ .-•** -^** '..f'^' ^..••'ins?-'*- .-•' ^^r" ...-••' ^K/ iy, •^iy '?''"'".-'S.^ " . /- \ ^' '. ClS?' ^•'f°'}-..!&y q<^\^.^ ^y"^ ^ v^.^ 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through :- Its Secretary Public Works Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur(C.G.) 2. Chief Engineer, Public Works Department Bilaspur (C.G.) 3. Suprintendent Engineer, Public Works Department, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur (C.G.) 4. Shri Peeladas Work Charge, Driver Public Works Deptt. Jashpur Division, Jashpur (C.G.) 5. Dilharan Singh Driver, P.W.D., Champa Division, Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 6. Dauram Driver, P.W.D. Pendra Division, Pendra Road, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) 7. Harikirtan Singh, Driver, P.W.D. Korba Division, Korba (C.G.) 8. ShankerSingh Driver, P.W.D. Bilaspur Division Bilaspur (C.G.) 9. Ravishanker Sahu Driver, P.W.D. Pendra Division Pendra Road, Bilaspur (C.G.) 10. Ganesh Singh Otty Driver, P.W.D. Pendra Division Pendra Road, Bilaspur (C.G.) 11. Maksud Khan Driver, P.W.D. Pendra Division Pendra Road, Bilaspur (C.G.) 12. Dujram Driver, P.W.D. Pendra Division Pendra Road, Bilaspur (C.G.) $6111 "PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA" XI-HC-22 3iR?i^r Sk-tt* SVKSI gTqWHfig v 1- ^^^,. >; y +'% 'Svl -i(|q!d'l|, tSTil^'IS. fslCII'My iiiwi w-irai . ^•<7. NOo. •Z-)S~ /O^, "* . W^ '200 fe^T ai^iTCnwgftCT 17;1-2006 Shri Vinod Deshmukh, Advo4ate, for the petjtioner. Shri Satish Gupta, Dy. Govt. Wlfelh TIIlRff ti 1s^ tfeRTC ^7 3lPgi[ 3D^[ Advocate for the State. Heard.. Learned counsel for the p^titioners submits that the petitioner was appointed on the post of l-1elper on| 1-3-1981 and since then he is working as Helper. He further submits that resjpondents no. 4 to 12 have been promoted but the petitioner has not been profnoted. Hesubmitted that he has submitted representatlons as per Annexure p-3, P-4 and P-5, but the same have not been decided. Counset for the State submil given an opportunity of filing thej ts that for the present the petitioner may be detailed representation afresh before the competent authority of the responc(ents, which shalt be considered on its own merits in accordance with law. I Having considered and with|out expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, in the opinion of this pourt, ends of justice will be served if a direction is given tothe petitione to make a detailed representation raising his grievances before the compet^nt authority of the respondents along with a copy of the petition within a mon]th from today, and on such representation being filed, the competent authori|y of the respondents shalldecidethe same on its own merits in accordance wjth law as early as possible preferably within four months from the date of rec^eipt of the representation. It is made clear that if any grievance still remajns, the petitioner may avail the remedy avaitable underthe law. With the aforesaid observal Certifled copy as per rules. ons, this petition Stands disposed of. Sd/- Fakhruddin Judge