Brijesh Prasad Divedi v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR REVP No. 154 of 2017 Brijesh Prasad Divedi S/o Shri Radhika Prasad Divedi, Aged About 50 Years Occupation Service Working As Forest Guard, West Barel, Range Baharasi, Forest Division Manendragarh, R/o Forest Colony, Janakpur, Post And Thana Janakpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Government Of C.G. Department Of Forest, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh

2. Conservator Of Forest, Forest Circle Ambikapur, District Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh

3. The Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division Manendragarh, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh

4. Forest Ranger, Forest Range Baharasi, Forest Division Manendragarh, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh

5. Director Forest Guard Training, School, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For petitioner :

Mr. R. K. Bhagat, Advocate.

For State/Res. No. 1,2, 4 & 5 :

Mr. Majid Ali, Dy. GA For Res. No. 3 :

Mr. H. S. Patel, Advocate ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order on Board 30/01/2018 1.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 23-08-2013 by which, he was directed to undergo training and interim order was operated in favour of the petitioner.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that later on, the petitioner carried an impression that respondent would not be insisting on this order. Therefore, he made statement that the petition is rendered infructuous in these circumstances. The petitioner would like to press the petition on merits.

3.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State and Mr. H. S. Patel would submit that the petitioner is liable to be sent on training. 4.

Considering that the petition was disposed off on the statement of the learned counsel for the petitioner and now the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents are still insisting the petitioner to proceed on training, order dated 02-11-2017 passed in WPS No.3608/2013 is hereby recalled and the writ petition is restored to its original number for final hearing on merits.

5.

This MCC is accordingly disposed off.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Rohit