•g— ~ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARHJYT BILASPUR (CG) WRIT PETITION N0. / 65 ^ /2005 PETITIONER %-^ ^ RESPONDENTS 1. ^. ^y ^ ^y^: ^y ^ .^ '3> o^'" 4. 5. f, ^^-—-^ ^^y% /.?ii ^' y. "X ^ 1 "^^2^^ II i l^^^^^.^ i| w:^,^/ •-?-'"^'<a ' ,,^ .3 < ^ ^<-a ,.;.^ <- 6. /7. Santosh Kumar Vishwakarma, aged about 36 years, son of Shri Vishwambhar Lal Vishwakarma, occupation - Grade III employee, Municipal Council, Sakti, presently transferred and working at Nagar Panchayat / Nagar Palika, Kharsiya Distt. Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) VERSUS The State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretaiy, Department of Local Self Government, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) The Director, Nagariya Niyojan Evam Vikas, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) The Collector, (Chhattisgarh) Janjgir-Champa The Deputy Director, Nagar Palika Prashashan, Bilapur (Chhattisgarh) The President, Parishad, Sakti, Distt. Champa (Chhattisgarh). Nagar p&^fe»< Janjgir- The Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Sakti, Distt. Janjgir -- Champa (Chhattisgarh) Shri Ram Dulare Rathore, aged about 40 years, occupation Grade III Nagar Palika Parishad, Pendra, presently at Nagar Palika Parishad, Sakti, Distt. Janjgir-Champa (CG) A- /•' WRIT PET3TION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. XI-HC-22 ^TT^T^T R?TT^3TI^T Sh^lcb^TficT ^-- 3^T ^ll^Kn^, ^Tft^^l^, fcldl^^i 3n^?r ^5|Ch ^ll*<dl »)^licb..^^.\£.^\^ OQ^ 32 3T1^T5^TT8fK^Tf?'cT 29-A.20Q5 Shri A. N.Bhakta, Shri Akhi! Agrawai, coun^e! for tho potitSoner. Pan|&i Lawyer for the State/respondents No.1 to 4. Heard both the counsei.l in thls wrtt petltion the employee pf Nagar Panchayal transfer to Kharsiya Nagar III empioyee of Nagar Paiika, Nagar Paiika and, thoroforo, Panchayat Sakti, he ought to vacancy whlch is lying in being empioyee of Nagar Pan{ to that post. But, contrary to Ignoring the ciaim of the thepostofA.G.-li. Learned ooun^eJ for tht airoady submittcd reprosontati^ is not being deci'ded, thereft <^i^f^41ri ^H^T^tel^t'<f^<^i< ^)3:rf^T3TT^T Ssetitioner's main grtevance is that he is an t/Nagar Paiika, Sakti. At present, heis on Pa^chayat, whereas, respondent No.7 is A.G." |Pendra. Presentiy, he i^ workjng in Saktj |ho poijtioner bomg an ompioyoQ of Nagar |have been promoted as A.G^II against the Na^ar Panchayat Sakti- Respodnent No7 not shayat Sakti he is entitled for the promotlon \ |the poticy decislon of the Government anti petiticjner respondent No.7 has been promoted on petitioner submite that the petitioner has t>n to rospondonts No/1 and 3, but th@ samo >re, he submits that respondent No.1 be XI-HC-22 3TT^T^T ^i<t)^n^r $h^I<t)^f?cT Ban/e >^ .^-' ^ 3^T r«Nld^,^Tfl^^l^, fG|^||y^< 311^1 M5i<sh r^^.^.^0,..^^ GO^ ^IN^fT»i+<|ch 3TT^?T B^n'^PC ^cT ot dir^cted to decide ihe ropres^ntation to which counsei for respondente No.1 to 4 has no objection. Having heard iearned records. Looking to the iimitecj petitoner, it is just and fair representation of the petitjone} after considering aSI the point^ mannQr in accordance with iaw.! ct>unsel for the parties, I have perused the request made by learned counsel for the to direct respondent No,1 to dedde the within a period of 2 months from today raised by the petitioner in an objeotive With the direction afores Consequently, M.(W.)P.| stand disposed of. Parties are entitied for c^rtified copy of this order. ^. cbl^fd^^ ^HC<lT^tel^l'<^l^<il< ^3Tf^1T3TT^T ssd, the petition stands disppsed of» No.1290/2005 anci i.A. No.3216/2005 also z^ Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge (^^fe^) .-^ ^