@ m m (W) BILASPUR 41 years, S/o Ex.-Panch'ayat Sitarampur, the Secretary, Develepment Raipur (C.G.) Nagariya Raipur Distt. working as Nigam Chirimi,‘ Nagar Panchayat Inspector, Distt. Surguja President Nagar Surguja (C.G.) Coostitution of m EmW am mm mW 311%81 3mm? waif ‘wm §t 3ifa'q m HIGH COURT OF C Writ Pet!tlo.1 PETITIONER Shti Se Te RESPONDENTS St Na De Th Th Up Su Sh Re Di B Sh Na (C. Sm Pa 0 R DHIRENDRA MISHRA, J. Sl1n‘VA.N. Pandey, couasel Shrl Rajendra Agrawal, Heard. I By this petition under Inelia, the petitioner has prayed HHATTISGARH AT {Cl No. 6645 of 2007 -Suc‘.heshwar Tiwari, aged about Ram Prasad Tiwari, etary, Village Panchayat sil-Pal, Distt:Surguja (C.G,) e of Chhattisgarh, through: ariya Prashasan and artment, D.K.S. Bhawan, Add] Diractor, Directorate hasan and Vikas, Chhattisgarh Callector Surguja (C.G.) er Collector Ramanujganj, guja(C G,) ‘ Vijendra Singh, Presently enue Inspector Nagar t. Korea (C.G.) t Toppo, Sub Engineer, ampur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.) ' Samsher Singh, Revenue ar Panchayat Balrampur, .l . Ravika Ekka, chayat Balrampur, Distt‘ A L 0 R D E R 03. 2008 for the petitioner. PL. for the State. Article 227 of the for following reliefs :- WW, m,W WWW WWW WWW r2, WWiii’ém *Wm “7‘1 That the Hon’b lssue appropna and also misu report. 7.2 The Hon’hle C disciplinary a in View of cnq 7,3 Tha Hon’blf: C other ancillary in the facts and 7.4 Cost of tha pet Learned counsel for complianca of the onicr c” already bean filed and sh lespondents No. 5 to 7 call the irregular payment mad Wm in 200 WW5 (W) e Court may kindly be pleased to direction to the’respondent No. 1 to ing the powers after the enquiry may kindly be pleased to direct the lity to issue the appropriate order repoxt at The earliest. t may kindly be pleased to grant any ief, as it may deem nt and to proper rcumstances of the case. 1 . » the respondents] State submits that in ated 7.1.2008, compliance report has ow-cause notices have been issued to 11g upon them, to show-cause as to why by them should not be recovered from them and disciplinary ac on under Civil Services (Classification Control 6n Appeal) Rules 1966 lead with Municipal Employees (Recruitment 8b Service against them. e petitioner submits that in View of the py the respondents No, 1 to 4, the ltands xedressed. Sdl- Dhirendra Mishra Learned counsel for compliance report tiled l grievance of the petitioner s Accordingly, the peti1 3 11ditions) Rules 1968 be not initiated ion is disposed oi Judge l i l i i i o u u‘ O i i t O ‘ l 1