← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/3/2016disposed off

Sukhram Yadav v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2016-01-06Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No.3 of 2016 Sukhram Yadav, S/o Shri Jagannath Yadav, aged about 55 years, Deputy Ranger (Forest), R/o Village & Post Dornapal, Police Station Dornapal, Tahsil Konta, District Sukma (CG). ---- Petitioner

Versus

1.

State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Department of Forest, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Police Station Rakhi, Tahsil & District Raipur.

2.

The Chief Conservator of Forest, Bastar Division Office Jagdalpur, District Bastar at Jagdalpur.

3.

The Divisional Forest Officer, Sukma Division, Office Police Station Sukma, Tahsil and District Sukma.

4.

The Sub-Divisional Officer (Forest), Dornapal Sub-Division, Tahsil Konta, District Sukma (CG) ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Satish Chandra Verma, Advocate.

For Respondents : Shri Om Prakash Sahu, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 06/01/2016 (1) Heard.

(2) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been superannuated from service treating his date of birth as 01.01.1954 whereas, the actual date of birth of petitioner is 01.01.1960, against which, he has made a representation to respondent No.3 i.e. Divisional Forest Officer, Sukma Division, District Sukma which has not been considered and decided by the said

authority. Therefore, he may be permitted to make a fresh representation to the said authority and may be directed to decide the same expeditiously.

(3) Prayer appears to be fair and reasonable.

(4) The petitioner is permitted to make a reprsentation before the said authority. If such representation is filed within a period of 15 days from today, the concerned authority shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law and on its own merit within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of representation along with copy of this order.

(5) It is made clear that this Court has not passed any order/direction for correction of date of birth of the petitioner. (6) With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s).

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge L/-