tl ^ 1 L^^1^9/°? ILSI S-iE MXDHT^ PB|ff>ESH ST&TE ^)I£m3Sl'R^TIVE 'IP.IBOEi^ " 3" A"B'"M<'P 'UR " (M JP) '1 " ' • • " ' Origlnal Xpplication M, ;/1995 K,S«jaiswaX - ^plxc^it .Versus- State of M«P»& otiiers - - - - ^ Mon-^plic^its,. ' 2EJ^ILS £^L^£>MG^3^>S /s»19 of__tfae .^dministrative Tribuaals Aet, 1985$ 1< 2. ^articul ars of the applic ant ^ i) ii) fatherts n^ne iii^ dat®of birth- d^) • designa'tloB V) 1 K^S^j^is^^i^ s S^ri T,S.JaiswaL, i 06»11.1966 < Upper Bivisioa Te&cher. ^polnteaent a^ Assistsit Oteacher » 14.8.1986 vi) date of sjppolntftientS 21 «9<1993 a3 ^Kper OivAstoa Steacher<» vii) qsialification viii) office $ M.Sc. BeEd. (ffirst Cl^ s) 1 Govt<Middl@ Sch©ol • Nonl^atfai, T^isil and Distt. Durg (M,P) . Payrticulass of tae respondents » fflaa sia -aa tt» aaB eaa a» i) State of Madhya-Pradesh, ^ixou^ t Secretary^ ^^^^ con td, • «2, J -$ 2 $- Sctaool. Ecfciaatton Departaent, ©ovt"o£M«P. Vallabh-Bhaar^iy Bhopal (M»P) . ii) •Jolnt-Director, S'chool";Education Durg Tgh. & DisttJ3urg <M,P) . (S) HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILA8PUR Writ Petition IS} No. 1089 of2005 Petitioner K. S. Jaiswal Versus Respondents State of Madhya Pradesh (now Chhatdsgarh) & anofher (SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Aguihotri J.) Shri V. G, Tamaskar, Advocate for the petitioner, Shn Yashwaat Siagh Thakur, Deputy Advocate General for ffae respondents. ORDBR (Oirall (Passed on fhis 12th day ofNovember, 2009) Heaid. 1. Learaed counsel appeanng for the petitioner subimts that fhe question of law iavolved ia fhis petition is goveraed by the Circular dated 20.1.1987. This Court by order dated 9th October, 2006, disposed of fhe Writ Petition No. 499/2005 (Rajeshwar Rao Kridat Vs. State of Chhatttegarh & ofhers), ia terms offhe order passed by the High Court of Madhya Piadesh ia Indraveer Sia^i Tomar vs. State of M.P. and others1, which was dteposed ofio. fhe followiag tenns : "2. ...,-Jn view of this submission advaxiced by Counsel for parties, fhis petition is disposed of by giviag follcwmg directions. The respondent No. 1 shall consider petitioner?s representations referred to above and dispose of the same at aa early date, preferably withm a period of 3 monfhs firom the date of conunuuication of fhis order in accordaace wifh law, keepiag ia nund the circulars issued by fhe State Govt, as also the directions given by fhe Tribunal ia similar matters^ 12004 (2) M.P.H.T. 3 (NOC) 2. 3. ^^ Thakur Q - Learaed counsel appearing for fhe rcspondente/State does not dispute fhe above submission made by leanied counsel appearing for fhe petitioner< In view offhe above, this petition staiids disposed ofwith Uberty to the petitioner to raake a representation to the concenied authority, raising his grievaace ia the Ught of fhe order dated 9th October, 2006 (supra), passed by this Court aad fhe order passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh m Indraveer Sin^h Tomar (supra), No order asto costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge