iStoLfc Kf tf' ^l<30 nr nie BIGH COCRT os* JUOICATUKB AT BOLAsroR W.P. {S\ Ko. ^ ^°3 /2006 (S.B.) VEfSlTlOWBS. 4 ^ ..-•""..-' .v^K^ ^^\y ^v-<y ^-y ^' ^' ~y <^'" ^' SEapovfDeasTS ROPBSa PAWDEy S/oShri M.P-Pandey Aged about 35 years Occupation-Asastant Project Officer, Jila Panchayat, Korba R/o Sitamani Korba District, Korba, (C.G.) VEBfflUS ^-1. ^' SECRB?FAKY Panehayat and Rural Development department D.K.S.Bhawan Mantrayalay Raipiir Chhattisgarh 2. Joint Secretiury Panchayat and Rural Development department D.K.S.Bhawan Mantrayalay Raipur Chhattisgarh /3. CoUector-Korba District, Korba, (C.G.) ^4. CIiiefEsecativeOflICCT Jila Panchayat Korba District, Korba, (C.G.) ^5. Smt. Shakuntala Kaawar Chairperson, Jila Panchayat Korba District, Korba, (C.G.) 5 WRIT ONDER ARTICfcB 226/227 OF THB COIISTITOTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUAJBTCE OF A SgBTjVtt.BWSIT. ORDERS OR DIRECTIOW. XI-HC-22 <7^ T«?'i||i)|?('i), Wfl'i?. t8i<tiy3< 311^1 ••isith ,__,^^ ^, _.^^.(s.2^t-LS'1^3/6 ~fc NIICTI sft*ii«n•••"••••"'•"•••••g^ 200 "f^re?;"""-" sn^rw R-fW3TI^5T sbii'htifer ShWf> 3n^r??aTWtifeT *iiifi'i41-i wRffff ted' <Riwi< ^ari^rsii^T es. ^ Raju 30fl 1/2006 Shri Prakash Tiwari, learnet Smt. Anju Ahuja, Dy. Go'l' 3/State. None for other respondent^. Heard. Petitioner has filed this wrt dated 03/10/2006 passed bythe £|t suspended frem his seryices on a<| in Government duty. The ord^r Chhattisgarh Civit Sen/ices (Cta^s 1966(henceforth,"theRules"). Petitioner has made decislr availed all the statutory and othe^ provisions. Here in the instant caA under the said Rules, Ruie 2j3 suspension made under Rule 9 o^ remedy is availabie with fhe pet jurisdiction of appeal, he has aj Article 226/227 ofthe Cpnstitution With the above observation, counsei for the petitioner. t. Advocate for respona'ents No. 1 to petition being aggrieved by the order tate Government, wherebv he has been ;count of jrregylarities committed by him has been passed under Rute 9 of |sification, Control and Appeai) Rules, ration in his writ peiition that he has remedies available under the reievant |e, the said declaration is not correct as provides appeal from the order of the Ruies. When apparently statutory |tioner, instead of invoking competent ||>proached this Court to stsp in under Nlndia. jthe writ petition is disposed w,^_ ••• Sd/- V.K.Shrivastava Judge (-N^A)