(L^L IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARH) W.P. (S) No.< (^t) /2010 PETITIONER ^^ x^ ^^^ -^y •o,...- ':',^y>" ^^- .A&u ^ RESPONDENTS Harish Chandra Sahu, S/o. Shri Devnath Sahu, aged about 45 years, R/o. Village - Chipli, Post 8s Tahsil - Nagri, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) VERSUS / (1) State of Chhattisgarh through its Secretary, Department of Forest, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) (2) Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division (Samanya), Dhamtari, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) (3) Depot Officer, office of Depot Officer (forest), Nagri, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 THE CONSTITUTION QF INDIA r^ ^n^T^T r^iph snf^T 5h<-iicb ^f^a T' •^ET r^ii^icri^, ^Til^^co, f^cni^y STT^T TR^ _U:S.W.... .:.Jl^ ^W^\{ 9b^ich ^^ST' ^n^r'^rr^n: ^f^r S.B.: HON'BLB JUSTICE MR. PRtTINKBR DIWAKBR 07-12-2010: couitLsel Shri Viaod Deshmukh, Shri Vaibhav Goverdhasi, P, Gxievance of the petitiouer though he is entitled for his Giiard, he has been regularized 04 (n the present petition is that ^rization ou the post of Forest the post ofwatehuiau. regul^rizati Counsel for the petitioner ^ have conipleted atl fhe formaUties favour of ftie petitioner aad theref^re niay be permitted to wifhdraw fhf to file a fresh representation be^re saine niay be directed to be deci4ed expeditiously as possible. subiliits Coiinsel for the State fhe fact he caanot niake any Govemnient is willing to regulariz|e on the post of Forest Guard objection if the petitioner nxake^ aufhority concemed aad the accordance with law. Accordiiigiy, the petition i^ tliat ia the eveut of any before respoudent No.2 raisiiig represe^itation CM^(<n41ri 'HTH^if ^ fe^ <P?i^i< ^^Tf^FT 3T[^T for the petitioner. f, for fhe State. ^ubmits that fhe respondente (for passing necessaiy order in at fhis stage fhe petitioner present petition with liberty respondent No.2 aad tlie ia accordance with law as fhat without ascertaiiimg statement whefher the StMe the ser^ices of tlie petitioner not, However, he has no a rcpresentation beforc the saiae is decided by it ia 4r + disposed of witli a direction filed by fhe petitioner his grievances, the saine is [^tfe^ r- ^^^^ /{" 1 ^ ^_ T^^' "s^^^€^'' ~^S[ r^|<4ld<LI, ^Tlly4!^. TG<^(^y + ^l*1dl 9hHtch siri^r ^ra"^ ^....v...a.^-^-ii^t/ IN^sr' ^n^T^T 'R^TS^T ?h^ict) ^f^a ^T^T'^n^^TfN expected to be decided by accordance wifh law as expeditiou^ t,|ie auftiority concemed in >ly as possible, It is niade clear tfaat this opiaion on nierits of ftie case would be at Mberty to decide fhe stadctly ia accordance wifh law, (pourt has not expressed any 4iid the axitlxorily coiiceraed r4presentation of fhe petitioner <=hl<Llid<lflr1 'RTR^Tf "^ 'fe^t ^^K ^r ^rf^rq ^3T^^^ Sd/- PritinkerDiwaker Judge [Tfr^ y<^.