w \wv WRIT PETITION (S) NO. (511% OF 2011 PETITION ER .RESPONDENTS VERSUS /’ 1. I Through: the Secretary, Department of-Women and Child Development, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Collector, Korba, District Korba (C.G.) K 3. 4. $mgle Bgnch IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATI'ISGARH AT BILASPUR (c.'G.) / , Smt. Aarti Yadav, W/o Rajendra Kumar Yadav, aged about 20 years, Resident of Village Barpali, District Korba (C.G.) {State of Chhattisgarh: Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Kartala, /’ Tahsii Kartala, District Korba (C.G.) Kiran Kurre, W/o Sunil Kumar Kurre, aged about 21 years, R/o Village Barpali (Pahripara), District Korba (C.G.) INDIA WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF W mu...“[AJf’TyZzZy/Qi 200 amtm (Wu) mmm mafwfwm§wm $aimm SB : Hon’ble Sin-i Manindr Mahan Shrivastava, J4 23.6.201 1 \ Mr Ravish Verma, cou sel for the petitioner. Ms. Sunita Jain, Pan 1 Lawyer for the State, on advance copy. Heard on admission. This petition has_ bee iiled by the petitioner aggrieved on account ofappointment of r spondent No.4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that both, the petitioner as well as respo dent No.4 had participated in the process of selection and ap ointment to the postof Aanganwadi i Worker. The case of the titioner is that even though the petitioner obtained higher rks as compared to respondent No.4, respondent No.4 has b en appointed and the petitioner has been deprived without any V id basis. It is submitted that under by the State Govt, the Collector is the Appellate Authority bef re Whom, the petitioner submitted representation on 8. l 1.20 10 (Annexure 13-4). lt is also submitted that the petitioner also repr sented the Project Oiiieer, but none of the authorities have taken any decision in the matter. Learned counsel for t State submits that under the State guidelines, the Collector is t e Appellate Authority to look into all the relevant guidelines issu e e a h these matters and the case by the Collector in accordam In view of the submis No.2/Collector is hereby representation/appeal in ac‘ as soon as possible, prefera' the date of service of-notice t With the aforesaid dire of. of the petitioner sha11 be considered §e with law. sions \ made hereinabove: respondent \ directed to decide petitioner’s L,ordance with iaw, expeditiousiy and 31y Within a period of 3 months from b respondent No.4. .ction, the petition is finally disposed f Sd/~ grea/Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge { Wm W200 ww(%f13§a) WWW r2, mafau‘mwtvfftWsdimu %sa"m31t%¥r