s-^<^(^ ?il?"EII S~ ;iS ,cw,."<-'<'^e->^.. '^s&^^^"" €)3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (CHHATnSGARhjl WR.IT PErrTIONNO.($/2-3' OF 2005 PETmONER : RESPONDENTS: Smt. Kumari Gupta Wife of Shri Suresh Kumar Gupta, aged about 46 years, Resident of Block Colony, P.H.C. Quarters, Pendraroad, District Bilaspur (C.G.). VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through: The Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.). 2. The Chief Medical Officer, Bilaspur, Dist. Bilaspur (C.G.). WRIT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WMT IN THE NATURE OF MANDA.MUS. CER.TIORARI. PROHIBmON ETC. ^.1- HC-22 311^? °R 'ivvs an^i iBtfe:Hfta 3^-Ml4 y^ -y5s ^)|A|id<<, »^y'i<S,fawitiyv l? . .'^"^£:.....&?..^Ll'^ ^..................-....-....^.....^^^ ^^ sn^r^giw^ftg 9-12-2005 Shri Bhaskar Payasi, counsel for .Aimexure P-1 dated 31-8-2005 dum] undergone Vaccination Traimng under i^Tiff<'i14h 'ITTR^ff ^ 'f^t ^; 3lfitTt'311^1 ^he'petitioner. Shri Vivek Sharma, Panel Lawy^r for tfee State; on aih'ance copy. Heard. Counsel for tfae petitioner submjits that the petitioner has been transferred as per the ban period. He furtfaer submits that in Coaimunity Healfh Centre, Gurela rip othe lady health 'visitor. is posted who had the Immunization Programme, He .further submits that she submitted a rqM'eseintation fas per Annexure P-3 and her - case has been. recommended by the Additional CoBe4or as per Aim&xure P-4. He submits tfaat for the present he may be given an opportunity ^o inake a representation before the resppndents. Haiiiig considered and without possible preferably within two months ^ ;xpressii%_any opimon on the merits of the case, in the opinion pf this Coun, ends ofjtstics will be served if a diirection is given to the petitioner to make a detailed Tepresen^tion raising her grievances before the competent aulfaority of respondents along with a tjopy of the petition and ttris order within 15 dav's from today and on such rq)resent4tion beii^ filed, the competent authority of respondents shaB decide the same on i^s own merits in accordance with law as earty as from the date ofreceipt ofthe representation. It is made clear that if any grievance remaitis, the petitioner may avail the remedy available under the law. Counsel iurther submits that th^ petitioner has not been reKeved and he may be aBowed to contmue tiB the decision ofthe representation. It is directed that^if the petitionej' has not been relieved, he may be aBowed to eontinue till the representatioa is decide4 With the aforesaid observations, ^his petition stands disposed of. Comequently M.W.P.No. 4S71| disposed of.Certified copy as per rules. i/2005 and I.A.No. 10146/2005 also.starid Sd/- Fakhruddin Judge 7.:--