c^ IN_THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARH) W.P. (S) No. '^)-6 /2010 PETITIONER ^ \ ..';.>Y .y^'' 9<^'^^i^"' .(<^^-!':"' RESPONDENTS Rikhi Ram Patel, S/o. Shri Kamplal Patel, aged about 47 years, R/o. Post - Sihawa, Tahsil - Nagri, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) Vj; R_S U S (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 UNDERARTICLE 226 THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA B—"- -HC-22 ^"T •^t'Mld^l, riTil'y'lto, [sldl'Hy 3TTet?r i(5ra? _......^.&.^.i WHfVl (hllch -|3%<[fo 200 fq^CT' SIT^T^iT h-u'h s^y ^•Ricb <lf^T an^r'S^'iWHf^i 13 Shri Viaod Deshiaukh. coui Shri Ajit Singh, P.L. for fhe. Grievaace of the petitioner though he is entitled for his reguls Guard, he has been regularized on| ib. Counsel for fhe petitioner s have coinpleted alt the fonnaMties favour ofthe petitioner aad therefi laav be permitted to withdraw fhs to file a fresh representation befi ~s- same Biay be dirccted to be decid expediuously as possible. Stt Counsel for fh.e State subl fhe fact he camiot m.ake aay Goveminent is wiUiag to regulariz^ on ftie post of Forest Guard c|: objection if fhe petinoner Biake; autliority concemed and the accordaitce wittt law. Accordingly, fhe petition is^ fhat ia the event of any;rcprese^ before respondent No.2 raisini (^i^*)1l 'qpT?Tf ^ f^st <r^<^|< ^TsriSgiTsn^T |sel for the petitioner. fiie present petinon is that (rization on fhe post of Forest the post ofwatchinan. s|iibinits tjiat the respondents for passiag aecessaiy order ia ^re at this stage titie petitioner present petition wifb. liberty >re respondent No.2 and the bd ia accordance with law as ilts fh.at wifhout ascertaiuiiij teteiaent whefher th.e State the services offhe petitioner r not. However. he bas no a representation before tlie same is decided by it ia disposed of with a direction itation ffled by the petitioner his grievances, fhe sajne is r^ifeq -f- ./J*s""'^ ..<''...•'"'••, ^ .^^3'"1?^'^. '-I ~''* ^XI-HC-22 ~yst -i||<<|!-)t|, e>Tfl'y'l<», («ldl'Mlj,< sn^r T^q? ..U:i2..:..0>J...©&?_L'>5.^^ "^ 200' '6 111CTI 9>wefi sii^rqii R-fi°b 311^1 5^i<=o ^f^a an^r'^R'iwgftCT expected to be decided by & accordaace wifh law as expeditious It is inade clear that this C<i opiuion on merits of the case a4d would be at Uberty to decide fhe re^ stricfly ia accordance wifh law. ct»i^[<n<n-ri ^i+Kni'^ P-s,^ ^^i< ^3iP<ra3n^i autiiority conceraed ia ^ as possible. >urt tsas not expressed any fhe aufhority concemed reseatation of the petitioner Sd/- Pritinker Diwakar Judge