. IN THE HIGH COURT‘OE, CHHATTIsGARH ‘ wn'r aimsPUR " V [WRIT JURxSDICTIoN'} :CIVIL WRIT PETITION No. i478 OF 2002 r x ‘IN THE ' MATTER QF: 3 . 8UB-DIVISIONAL Ol'l‘ICER , Water Management Subdivision No.7 Baleda Bazar, RE$PONDENTE Dietrict—Raipur The Hon'ble Chief Justice and Hi5 Campanion Justices Di? thee Hen'ble High Court of f/J Chhattisgarh at Bilagpur. PETITIOH UHDER ARTIaE 22‘6“ 1227 01' m CONSTITUTIOH Ol' Imlh ‘ ‘ / .‘rf'HORI ’TiATr Aged about 3'7 yearS S/o'late Sudal Dhruw “Village a: Fast — Pangaan, ”T‘ahsil —~ Baloda Bazar, LDis‘tt‘. Raipur [Chhattisga'rh] XE, r VERSUS V1.8TA‘1'E OE CHHATTI‘SGARH Secretary I V] )"‘,.umu“‘"“".: /l@’% Water Resources Departmewf‘; Ng" g;:;~;:::/I 1;:5 ’Secretariat, Raipur {C.G.ig9"‘ A} 2.x:mcUwIvm manna, Water Resources Division No. 2 Baloda Bazar, Diett. - Raipur @p XI-HC-22 am W qmw%w?w“f{/°§7/m mg eméwEm ‘ _ A 24—07-2002 Shri K.M. Gupta, couns¢1 for the petitioner. Shri Ranbir Singh, Govt. Adv. for the State/respondent No. 1. Heard. Apalt E0111 challenging his termination, the peh'tioner also raised grievance against-the inaction on the part of the Department in not taking a dicision on his Iepxesentation dated / '30- 10—200 1. The‘facts in bn'ef are that, on the death of his father, the petitioner was given compassionate appointment in the year 1997. Subsequently on 06-06-1998, his services were terminated in view of the orders of the General Administrative Department of Government Of Madhya Pradesh, whereby a decision was taken that the services of all persons appointed on daily wage basis after 31-12-1988 should be discontinued. According to the petitioner, subsequent. thereto, an order was issued on 17-05-2000 that the services of all those persons who are given compassionate appointments after 31- 12- 1988, be [new mew Xi-HC—22 Wr W v m 209 mg: ané‘a'm “EkaqWE‘? . w‘ i m” mam W'rqFawFé’rr mmanw r Fl’ not terminated. In View of this cimular, the instructions of the M G.A.D., the petitioner had submitted a representation for l mconsidemh'on of his case whitrh has been indicated above, is still pending. In the‘abnve View of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to reconsider the matter and dispose of the representation of the petitioner on its own merits, Wi1hin a period of six weeks from ‘ the date of communication of this order. Certihed copy asper rulesLM/k Sdl- ‘ RC-Naik T r \ Judgerrrr , 74 ‘ > Murthy .yhn ,5