0% (57 v 3m§L§§§Ew$i{ IN THE HIGH COURT OF BILASPUR AT CHHATTISGARH WRIT PETITION (S) No? 1U OF 2010 Sukdev Ratre, S/o. late Shri Selhu Ram Ratre, aged about 40 years, working as Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Urba, Block—Tamnar, District Rajgarh (co) PETITIONER VERSUS : l) State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, D. K. S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C. G.) /' , 2) Comm1s310ner, Tribal Welfare Department Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C. G.) /5; ) Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department ' Raigarh, Distt; Raigarh (C. G.) 4)») Murlidhar Sharma, S/ o. Keshav Prasad Sharma, Assistant Grade—III, Govt. High School Bijana, Block Tarnnar, Raigarh Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) ; @Ck 5) (ghyam Sunder Patel, S / d. Jhaneshwar Patel, aged about 38 years, Assistan Grade—111, Offme of the Block Ofiice; Dharamj aigarh, Raigarh District Raigarh (C. GJ ARTICLE 226 OF THE WRIT PETITION UNDER CONSTITUTION OF INDIA A” “‘v “!A a t SB : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITIN GB. 12.2019 Shi‘i Harish Khuntiya ccunsel f0 the petitioner. Shri Praveen Das, Dy. GA, for t e State‘ By this petition, the petitions has prayed for issuance of direction to grant benefit of promotion ith ail consequential benefits. It is submitted that the petition r who was initially Working as Contingency Paid Employee/Daily W ge Empioyee with effect from 28.9.87, later on, after completion of three years as a Daily Wage employee, appointed as an employee o Work charged Establishment. Earlier, the petitionerhad filed a peti on before this Court claiming regularization and promotion, wherein an order was passed directing the respondent authorities to de ide the representation. In compliance of order passed by this Court, the Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development assed an order on 20.5.08 holding that as no vacancies are av ‘lable, case of the petitioner would be considered on availability of vacancy as also in View of the appropriate directions by the State Go ernrnent with regard to filling up the backlog post. Finally, vide or er dated 16.02.09 (Annexure P/2) the petitioner has been granted r gular appointment on the post of Peon. Counsel for the Petitioner su mits that as reps. 4 dis 5 who were appointed after 31.12.1988 i.e. after the appointment of the petitioner as Daily Wage employee, h ve been regularized/promoted on the post of Peon, therefore the pe itioner is also entitled for the same benefit. From the averments made in he petition and the grievance raised in the representation, it is und that the petitioner has claimed promotion to the post of As istant Grade-ill However, the LL 7_ With the aforesaid direction, the petition is finally disposedL Sdl— /__ Pritinker Diwaker Judge his am ‘ ?a:wmaQ£ mv@;%aKaI O m m e.w. L AO 5’ \p man W m WW W113?W WW m matm ’a? afar:m been disclosed in the petition‘ From a Demsal of order dated 20.5.08, it is clear that ail these persons were granted regular appointment prior to the petitioners. The petitioner has made representation on 29. 10.20 10 claiming promotion on the ground that persons appointed after him, were regularized and then promoted. l Taking into consideration, the nature of grievance involved in Taking this petition, it would be open for the respondent authorities to consider the grievance of the petitioner and take appropriate decision on the same, in accordance with law‘