1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3564 of 2018 1 - Asharam S/o Mahesh Yadav Aged About 40 Years R/o Thengapara Salna, Tahsil Baderajpur, District Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department, Of Forest, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Divisional Forest Officer, Kondagaon Forest Division, District Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Chief Conservator Of Forest, (Administration / Non Gazetted), Chhattisgarh, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. H.B. Agrawal, Senior Advocate along with Ms. Swati Agrawal, Advocate For State : Mr. Dashrath Prajapati,Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 24.02.2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition by directing the respondents to consider the case of regularization of petitioner like others and also to issue regularization order within Digitally signed by REKHA SINGH -2- stipulated period, because it is pending since long. 10.2 Costs of the petition be awarded and 10.3 Any other relief or direction which the Hon'ble Court may deems fit, be also awarded.” 2. Mr. Agrawal, the learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner would submit that the case of the petitioner for regularization has not been decided till date by the respondent authorities. He would further submit that the present petition was disposed of vide order dated 09.05.2018 whereby the respondent authorities were directed to decide the pending representation of the petitioner within a period of three months. He would contend that the address of respondent No. 2 was not properly mentioned, therefore, MCC No.691 of 2024 was filed which was allowed on 07.08.2024 and the writ petition (WPS No.3564 of 2018) was restored to its original number. He would further contend that thereafter the petitioner moved an application for amendment to correct the address of respondent No. 2 properly and the same was allowed by this Court vide order dated 09.09.2024. He would submit that a direction may be issued to the respondent authorities to decide the pending representation of the petitioner. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Prajapati, the learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State would oppose the submissions made by Mr. Agrawal. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 3 5. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the petitioner is a daily wage employee of 1989 and despite the case of the petitioner forwarded to the Chief Conservator of Forest way back in the year 2009, it is high time that the decision should be taken in the case of the petitioner by the Office of Chief Conservator of Forest, Chhattisgarh at the earliest and in any case, not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha