IN THEHIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BLLASPUR (C.G.) W^P. Np.^</2006 PETITIONER: •^. .*' ^ ..•••w.y' ^^ ^M^- ^'^i'^"" .^' ..-••" Hiralal Kosare Aged about 38 years S/0 Shri Khorbahara Ram Kosare Upper Division Teacher Govt. Middle Boys School Bharritola District Rajnandgaon R/0 Village 85 Post Bharritola Tehsil Manpur District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS: L .f^y% ^- 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe Development Department Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2. Commissioner/Director Tribal Welfare Department Government of Chhattisgarh Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ,3. Additional Director y Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe Backward Class and Minority Cominunity Welfare Department, Gdvernment of Chhattisgarh, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 4. Collector District Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh) S'lT •.•£'Sv£S:!!SSSS.?:!r?- i 'C^SWf 5. Assistant Coinmissioner Department ofTribal Development Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh) 6. Shri Anil Kumar Pandre S/0 Not known Upper Division Teacher Middle School, Khadgaon District Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh) PETITION_UNDER ARTICLES 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIAJ^RJSSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRITS OF MANDAMUS AND CERTIORARI AND FOR OTHER SUITABLE WRITS AND DIRECTIONS:- Ulli Hi!©H^oyB^^i(3iHi€ttiiiiffUMBs8BfiSSSISIt$ff VyRn-:)3BriTI©NN<QM250R2QQ6 REFITIONER •.Versusg;;:'.:.';.-,".',,;')'' StatgopiShhattisgarh&Others RESPQNDEN'rS ^ W.RNos^31;432,433;^34,43S, 43ft 437,438 and 505^6^ (Writ^petitionsunderArticl&:22g/22^<^the,Cori^tytionofl 'Single^encH;:No®I§Shrj^ti§h,K;^Fiih<Mri,J,^'^ F^ent;-: SMyitendraF^i,Gourisel^ ^ Shrr;\^S£Nyrthy,»l^me^Dy.^v. ^ere :Sndhar,^anefcl^wyerforthe;State.:?ti^ !" !.', ::./t;;:.,,^;'©gD@RgOgAy^^,.>^^^^^^^^^^^ ::,. .' . '.•••^^ ,''.1;,1 :.•;-.']'}.,.(Passea^|s22"^^ 1.:VV.R.Nos^5,'431,432;433,434,4^,;i43^M^ 2006 inVc^ye^cofTmion^e^ and a^txwn^ • , ^uch.they^re^bgjrig^ispE^^ 2. ^haltenge insfhesesRetjtjGing^^^^ ^nnexure^P/1^to^R^^^sf20p6)?whereb^^^ the petitionera to Ae pt^^^^U .^neelled.;::.;'.'..'....:•:•.,..;.::;'^ :. ' : -.. 4. Gbnlention of the tearF^ ^oansel appearing for the petitiQrfe^^ te thatbytheimpugriedrtrenTO:clated 30^2-200%,^ to(ahselthepromotion;tt p^iti6here^reasked^fe a p^riod ofcihe vreek.; T^s, the^^^ c^use n(^i(»,butpost^asional notiGe,;^^^^ laW.asTeplytotl^n^c^havebeeomeamepe^fo ppportunity of hearing t&the peti^ eases.;'^" .;:,•,..,•'. '":; • •:;,1" ;'.,' ' ; .:;.';1'.: :'•':.;'; -o •% ^s?s^^-?"w Gowri At this juncture, Shri Murthy, learned Dy. Adv. General appearing with Shri Sridhar, learned Panel Lawyer for the State, submits that pursuant to the notice dated 30-12-2005, no final order has been passed whereby the promotion of the petitioners on the post of Upper Division Teacher has been cancetled. Thus, these petitions are premature, at thisstage, notice does not raise any cause of action. Further, no order of cancellation of promotion has been passed. A fresh show cause notice may be issued to the petitioners, if so advised, before passing any prejudicial order. Having regard to the facts situation of the case, it is not necessary to go into the merits of the case, however, the impugned memos dated 30-12-2005 deserve to be and are quashed. On the request of tearned counset for the State, liberty is reserved to the State/respondents to issue fresh show cause notice to the petitioners, if so advised, affording reasonable time to the petitioners to file response, if any, consider the same and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law and on its own merits. Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of. No order asto costs. Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge