@ls8"tg IC RS&E»'a?l (^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH WMT PETITION Noy^S^ /2006 1.*-': PETITIONER ^ -^:.- \ 60'-'';..^>^?a:"'""" ,,,J^^gF^ .^^•^^^" .^' RESPONDENTS ^ /" '^^y ^ ^.° \0 ^ ^^ Chaitram Jare S/o Shri Karoo Ram Jare aged about 26 years, R/o - Village - Amatola Block- Manpur, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through - Secretary, Panchayat SE Rural Developm.ent Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Manpur Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 3. Head Master, Vaikalpik (Unnayan) Primary School, Amatola, Manpur Distt. Rajnandgaon PETITION UND^R ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^.<r"^s '-t,. M-HC—78 s^vw W\<t '(PSIT SH^TsFRT^ ^ Sfc ^' ^meir •s»><(ra» 7SET •^I^IIM-M, ®tllwiS,f°<dl'yl^(. ^..^A.....!^.^ 3n^T'tRR? (1pi3^^) TOnwdft^aii^T SB: Hon. Mr. Justice Pritin!< Shri Anup Majumdi Shri Yashwant Si Smitha Ghai PL for Shri Amrito Das co Case of the petitioner is I Instructor in Panchayat an^ Subsequently, after up-gradati< under Sarva Shiksha Abhiyanj scale of contract teacher Gratie was terminated from service vl' is the said termination order ^ petition. Contention of the couns filing of the present petition, th vide order dated 29.6.2006 now the limited relief of the salary for the period 22.2.2006 <*1^4l'1 'WE?ff ^f fe^ <F>l^rt< ^3ffiPT3II^t er Diwaker ar counsel for the petitioner. [igh Thakur Dy. AG and Smt. the respondents No. 1 and 3. jnset for respondent No.2. :hat initially he was appointed as Rural Welfare Department. 3n, he was appointed asGuru Ji scheme and was given the pay III. Thereafter, the petitioner de order dated 22.2.2006 and if yhich is under challenge in this i^i for the petitionei- is that after <e petitioner has been reinstated p^ssed by respondent No.2 and p^titioner is in respect of grant of jto 29.6.2006. -SFRITS XI-HC—78 9S^V qn 1<;-) '<WT 3H^9T sfRN? 't — gEs. '3'sr '<1|<<|<1*|, yal'y'Ko, facii'My HWWI 'SKWn "^200 sn^i Tra??( iqi^q^r) TRIIW flfta aii^i -2.- Counsel for the petitionei] very low paid employee circumstances he is working ^is that the respondents have go1] schemeand the salary forthe ^i him by them. Lastly, he a suitable representation to direction for deciding the sam^ payment of salary for the afl submission of the counsel for| respondents, have no objection| submitt that the Accordingly, the the representation, if any, period of three weeks from accordance with law. 4»T^d4i^^w^ ^ fs^ ^<$K iTaffinsn^i submits that the petitioner is a |and under the compelling 4is Guru Ji. He further submits sufficient fund under the said ^foresaid period can be given to petitioner would make [jespondent No.2 and seeks a sympathetically and to make lorementioned period. To this ]the petitioner, counsel for the responc|ent No.2 is directed to decide m^de by the petitioner within a thje date of its receipt strictly in The petition is thusdispo^ed of in the afore-stated terms. Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge o