z TTHB HIGH COTJRT OF JUDICATURB AT BILASPUR ioeAKU ^2GO< PETITIONBR Ai'uti Kuiiiar Khalkiio, Aged about 30 years, ..••"^'vt¥-' S/'o. Johau Klialkho, C/o. Village & Post ^-•^vSfy-' ...•• Koshtapara, Bhairamgarh, District Dantewada '~'"L-S'•^/-•'-<--: Z1<—.<;-T-^-i1 ...•-l^-i(V)'t?--"" .-•••'"..^^y' .AO-'* ,\^,/i ^ *^**' ^y^^ (CjiiiatfcisgaTJi) VBRSUS ^<e." ..-•• a^'^@^rO^iD@^i? A| .-o.<)' 2] ^..^ £^3' ^ <&» '^! o-' .-tr f ^^-t I^-^-t-t-t^t/'-'-^-w-L-fc J. I OLia.LC UI \--IlIliAtllagfcU.ll, /Ti1—_—-^—t-- c~i^^——^.n—- JT'_S^-,^^ 'Ttr'^IJ'—_— ti^ oecretsrv, ITIDSI w<igiia:re Deptt., U.K.S. Biiawan, Kaipur (CO) Collector, Daiitew-a-da, L/sl^stun i^sstsr, Usrit^w'sd.s. i'C/\j°i Director, Paiichayat and Orasiiii ^vikas Vibhag, Chhattisgarh, Raipur, District Raipur jCGi ^ v ^ 41 •y ^ L'liiet i^/xecutive ijilicer. Paiichayat, BhaJTaiiigarh, Dantewada fCOi Janpad. DisitTict 5] Block Education Oi^ceT) Jai'ripad Psn.clia.yat, .Biiair&iugsTh.^ Disstrict Uaiitewaci^. iL-Ui ^] Chief Execufclve Officer. Zila Panchayat, Dantewada, Dieistrict Usjitew^&cis. {u^~t PBTITION ARTICLS 236/227 OF CONSTITUTION OF IWDIA SheetZ ^ ^.'".l" HIGH COURT OF JXTDICATURE CHHATTISGARH: BILASPUR Sin^e Bench; Hoa'ble Shri Satisb K. Agaihobri, J. W. P. No. 1036 OF 2006 Petitioner : Arun Kuinar Khalkho Versus Respoadents : State of Chhattisgarh & Others. Shri Maaoj Ftoanjpe, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Suml Otwaai, pauel lawyer for the respondents. ORAL ORDER (24t- March, 2006) 1. This petition chatlenges the impugned order dated 30.11.2005, (Aruiexure P-9), passed by the respondent No.5, whereby the Officer Incharge of Prunaiy School Raiii Bodli, Block Bhau-amgarh, District Dantewada, has been directed that the order dated 20.10.2005, (Annexiire P-5), passed by fhe Janpad Panchayat, Bhairanigarh, appouiting Shiksha Karmi, Grade-III, be not given effect to without permissiou of District CoUector, Daatewada. 2.' Learaed counsel for the petitioner submits fhat the petitioner was duly selected and appointed as Shiksha Kanni Grade-III, vide order dated 20.10.2005 (Annexure P- 5), passed by the respoadent No.6. Thereafter, fhe petitioner subinitted the jonung report on 2.12.2005, (Aniiexure P-8). Leamed couasel has furfher subinitted that the petitioner had joined the duties on 2.12.2005, itsetf. 3. The petitioner was infonmed that the entire selection process appointiiig Shiksha Karmi Grade-III, has been caacelled. It is furfher contended that the petitioner has not /^l 1 > ^ ~^^^^s '^^F&^y^ '-s. received aay written inform.ation as yet about canceUation offhe selection proceediugs, or tds appointinent. 4. Leamed counsel appearing for the respondents No.l, 2 aud 3, subinits fhat fhe petitioner has never joiaed pursuant to his selection and appoiatinent as Shiksha Karmi, Grade-IIl, as fhe Amiexuiie P-8 is the application m.ade by the petitioner to the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad panchayat, Bhau'aiagarh, for his jouung. It was furtfaer subinitted fhat since the entire selection proceedings have been quashed aad new selection process has been initiated, the petitioner does not have any right to fhe appoin.tnient. 5. Be fhat as it inay, learued counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has made a representation, (Aimexure P- II) to the Secretaiy Scheduled Caste, ScheduJed Tribe aad Backward Classes, WeUare Department, Goveniment of Chliattisgarh, therefore, the respondents niay be directed to decide the said representation within a stipulated period. 6. Having heard leamed counsel for the parties, in the facts aad circumstances ofthe case, the respondents are dirccted to consider and decide fhe representation (Annexure P-11), in accordance with law, wittun a period of three weeks, firoin the date ofreceipt/production ofcopy offhis order. 7. In view of foregoiug, this petitioa stands disposed of. No order as to costs. _ 1 Satish K. Agaihotri Judge o^