Barat Lal Sahu B. L. Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 3755 of 2015

1. Barat Lal Sahu ( B. L. Sahu) S/o. Shiv Nandan Sahu, Aged About 54 Years Posted As Blaster, At C. M. D. C. Boxite Mines Daldali, Distt. Kabirdham (Chhattisgarh)

2. Ram Lal Satnami S/o Jait Ram Aged About 51 Years Posted As Blaster, At C. M. D. C., Mainpat, Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja (Chhattisgarh).

---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Mines Resource, P. S. Rakhi, New Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

2. The Managing Director, Chhattisgarh Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. Head Office Sonakhan Bhawan, Ring Road No. 1, Village Puraina, Post Ravigram, Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

3. The General Manager, Chhattisgarh Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. Sonakhan Bhawan, Ring Road No. 1, Village Puraina, Post Ravigram, Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

4. The Officer Incharge, C. M. D. C. Sub- Office Ambikapur, District Surguja, (Chhattisgarh)

5. The Officer Incharge, C. M. D. C. Sub- Office Dantewada, District Dantewada, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioners : Shri Jeet Patel, Advocate.

For Respondent No.1/State : Shri Yashwant Singh Thakur, Dy.A.G.

For Respondent No.2 to 5 : Shri A.S.Kachhawaha, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Pritinker Diwaker Order On Board 15/10/2015 Grievance of the petitioners are that though they are entitled for their promotion on the post of Mates from that of Blaster post (Class-III) but till date their case has not been considered. He submits that ignoring the case of the petitioners number of other persons have been promoted. Counsel for the petitioners submits that at this stage the petitioners may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to file detailed

representation before respondent No.1 and in turn the respondent No.1 be directed to decide the said representation expeditiously. Counsel appearing for the respondents have no objection to the above proposition as put forth by the counsel for the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are permitted to withdraw this petition with the aforesaid liberty. In the eventuality of filing representation by the petitioners within a period of one month from today it is expected from the competent authority to decide the same as expeditiously as possible preferably within a further period of two months. It is made clear that this Court has not observed anything on merits of the case and it would be for the authority concerned to decide the same strictly in accordance with law.

Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge suguna