¢- HIGH COURT OF CHHA’I’TISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition No. 3130 of~2003 Petiu‘oner DURGA PRASAD SAHU AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS SON OF SHRI B.P. SAHU PUMP OPERATOR GRADE-1 CHHA’I‘TISGARH STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED R/O VILLAGE DEORANI, POST MALDI TAHSIL BHATAPARA DISTRICT RAIPUR C.G. Versus RespondCnts : 1. STATE OF CHHA’ITISGARH THROUGH THE SECRETARY- DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 85 INDUSTRIES, MANTRALAYA, D.K.S. BHAWAN, RAIPUR (C.G.) . CHHATTISGARH STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED THROUGH THE GENERAL MANAGER 3/4, M.R. COLONY, SHAILENDRA NAGAR, RAIPUR (C.G) 3. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE &. INDUSTRY MANTARALAYA VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MP) 4. AUDYOGIK KENDRA VIKAS NIGAM (GWALIOR) MARYADIT (UNDERTAKING OF GOVT. OF MP.) THROUGH THE GENERAL MANAGER 52, RAVI NAGAR, GWALxOR (MP) 5. MADHYA PRADESH INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED TROUGH THE GENERAL MANAGER “A.v.N. TOWERS” 192, ZONE — 1 MP. NAGAR, BHOPAL (MP) Single Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Apihotri. Shri Malay Kumar Bhaduri, counsel for the Petitioner, Shri Pankaj Shrivastava, Panel lawyer for the Respondent No. 1. Shri Bhaskar Pyasi, counsel for the Respondent No. 2. ORAL ORDER (13th January, 2006) Learned counsel for the peu'tioner submits that the petih'oner was appointed as Pump Operator Grade-I by the Respondent No. 4 and posted at Gwalior in the year 1992. The petitioner made a repxesentation on 31.10.2002 to the Respondent no. 2 for taking his selvice by the Chhattisgarh State Industrial Development Cmporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as “CSIDC”) on transfer or allocatlon The Respondent No 2 by letter dated 31 10 2002 Informed to the Respondent No 4 that CSIDC was willing to take service of the petitioner on allocation to the State of Chhattisgarh. The Respondent No. 4 sent a communication to the Respondent No. 5 by letter dated 3.12.2003 (Annexure P—3) for grant of ‘no objection certificate’ for transferring service of the petitioner to CSIDC, Raipur. Government of Madhya Pradesh also approved and granted ‘no 'objection’. Service of the petitioner was transferred to CSIDC, Raipur as Pump Operator and he was posted at CSIDC, Raipur by relieving order dated 4.3.2003 (Annexure P-7). The Petitioner joined the service on 10.3.2003 (Annexure P-8) at CSIDC, Raipur. After sometime the Respondent No. 2 declined to accept service of the petitioner on the ground that Respondent No. 2 had granted ‘no objech‘on’ only on condition that service of the petih'oner was allocated to the State of Chhattisgarh. In the present case, the petitioner was not allocated to State 'of Chhattisgarh, despite ‘no objection’ granted by all the respondents. f The Petitioner has tiled this petition praying that the Respondents No. 1 and 2 be directed to allow. the petitioner‘to perform his duties as Pump Operator Grade—I with the Respondent No. 2. At this stage, lV/A learned counsel for the patitioner confines his submission that the respondents be directed to consider his representation for allocation to the State of Chhatn'sgarh, in accordance with law, to which learned counsel appearing for the Respondents No. 1 and 2 have no objection. Accordingly, the petitioner is at liberty to make a representation to the concerned authorities of the respondents for consideration and decision on his application with regaid to allocation of his service to the State of Chhattisgarh. In the event, if any representatiOn is made, the concerned authoxities are directed to consider and decide the same within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the representation, in accordance with law. In View of the foregoing, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. i' i ’7 Sd/- : , . Bablu Satish K. Agnihotri Judge