!iy§Ii^ n r'^?^^ i; '•-f. 't. sl c s-\ 0 O IN THE HI6H COURT QF JUDICATURE CHHATHS6ARH AT BILASPUR W.P.NO. O^ / 2006 Petitioner : / Ram AvyiB^h Singh Shadauriya ^..••'" ^,.' S/o Shf! B.S.Bhadcwt'iya, \.^'Sw>-- ..•••''*A9ed dbout 47 years, Posted as Senior )^''^\(^ ....•••" Horticulture DsvsiQpR'iSr.t Officer at the ..••°'''KS^'\^. Office of Pendra Road, Lalpur, t)ist : .^•'^>v ^A:: /^'.. '%:.^" Versus Bilaspur-(C.5.) IA>. Respondents / 1. 2. ^ c^R& <T^D^9?Y ^ "*< \'ri\\6(o ^ ^.^3- ^ Q.B&^-/ State of Chhattisyirh Through - Its SiBcfetary Agriculture O^pgrtment, &.K.S. Bhawan Raipur, Mantrstaya Raspur, Dsst •. Raipu"' (C.6.) The birecfor Agriculture / Horticulture Raipur-(C.6.) '-'•/ The Deputy / Asst. Director Horticulture, bist: Raipur-(C.6.) / WRIT PETTrEON UNDER ARTCCLE 226 / 227 QF TME CONSTSTUTlON OFINblA FORISSUANCE OF SUITABLE WKXT, WRITS. &1e CTi:OM ETC TO DO JUSTCCE IN THE AAATTER. Particulars of the Petitioner ; ^s per the cause title above. f'syRsy s3'-"-1 j ^^'L*»-§'/s^^[t'ticu'ar's°^t'1e ResPOnc'ents : As per the cause title above. 3. Pgrticulars of the order aqainst which the.petition is directed:- i) .'.•) iii) Order No. : Orderdate '. Passed by : F-2-3/Estha/2005/14-l 27.12.2005 RespondenT no.l (Avar Sachiv) XI-HC-22 Sil^I^iT [<;•<).'* sn^r shtfl^> ^(ia v Gowri '\~ -yst •^nqRra. 'S'BRTTC. Ncirey. ^3TT^T ^^;^ /^ ..wi.^.,...H..l^a 2 ><I*)CTI a!*ii<ah 'H^ 200 sn^i ?^iiwgf?!i M^eofr Shri Anil Singh Rajput, oounsel br the petitioner. Shri P.S. Koshy, Dy. AdvocateC^eneral for theState. Heard. Learned counsel for the petiti' transferred from Lalpur, Pendra Roa|d to Korba vide order dated 27-12-2005 (Annexure-P/1). He further submits that| transTerred that too without coordinatiorti also submits that on teing transferred would be adversely affected. Learned c^ for the present ends of justice will be s^ authorities to decide the representation ]during the ban perioct the petitioner has been and prior approval of the Chief Minister. He the eduoation of theohlldren ofthe petitioner )unsel appearing for the petitioner states that in/ed if a direction is given to the responctent jsf the petitioner. The prayer is not opposed by-th^ Having cohsidered and without case the petitioner is directed to make a before the competent authority of respi filed, the competent authority of the res merits in accordance with law as eariy months from the date of receipt of n grievance still remains, thepetitioner me Learned oounsel for the petitioni been relieved. He prays forgrant of inte| In view ofthe above, it is direete be allowed to continye titl the represenf petitioner has already been relieved, this the earlier place of posting. With the aforesaid obseryations, Consequently, M.(W.).P.No.4/06 «iii<il<-i41'< iiwcfl'? fyzt tf"i<$i< ^sriitraan^i ner submits that the petitioner has been State counsel. lexpressing any opinion on the merits of the ^letailed representation raising.his grievances ^ndents alongwith a copy of the petltion and thjs order within a period of 15days frfim today and on such representation being fponctents shall decide the same on its own ]as possible preferably withiri a pertod qftwo ^presentation. it is made clear that if any ty avail the remedy available under the law. ^r submits that ffll date the petitionef has not tim relief. . ' |d that if the petitipner is not reliev^t he may tation is deoided.It is made clear that if the orderwill not entitle the petitionerto rejoinat fhis petition stands disposed of. ]& I.A.No.8/06 also standjlisDQsedLoL Sdf- Fakhruddin Judge