^^^,0) ra.?.f.i! IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.fSl N0. f^%2> /2010 (S.B.l ^ PETITIONERS <^ MW^ o. ^?/ ^".^^- 45^' -.,°•* .,*' 'c^ .^ RESPONDENTS :1 Ram Charan Rathour S/o Shri Lalji Rathour, aged about 48 years, working as Assistant Grade-III in office of District Education Officer Janjgir, Distt.- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.). 2 Rishi Kuinar Shanna S/o Shri Pleshav Chandra Sharma,aged about 42 years, Working as Peon in office of District Education Officer Janjgir, Distt.- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). VERSUS : 1: State of Chhattisgarh Through :- The Secretary, Department of School Education, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The District Education Officer Janjgir, Distt.- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). M ^) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA '3^ ^WM^, 8)Tll<H'l<o, rs|C1iylJ,< lA)^,C?>3^!°- 'OTISiI^fl»i(W Tumane SB : Hon'ble Shri Manindra Mohan IShrivastava, J. 30-07^010 Shri R. R. Soni, counsel for ths Shri Vinod Tekam, Panel L4 advance oopy. Heard on admission. Grievanoe of the petitioners al petitioners were given regular appoj department, they are entitled to ben|i government oireular 25-10-2002 (3), it has been provided that in the| regulaF-appointment, the services rej employee shall be taken into con^ petitioner submitted that the petitionl employees preferred representatiot Education Officer in this regard vid^ decided till date. Taking into consideration th^ respondent No.2-Distriot Education appropriate deoision on petitioners within a reasonable period. In case,| would be open for the petitioners to be available to them under the law. With the aforesaid direction, t>1f <*l'i|fd4!^ •qi'RJT4 fS'zi'^ cf> affOTsiit^r petitioners. wyer for the State/respondents on ajs set out in the petition is that after |ntment against regular posts in the ifit of pay proteotion as provided in (Ar^nexure P-3) wherein under Clause 1 matter of fixation of initial pay upon idered as contingency/work charged tideration. Learned oounsel for the ^B along with other similarly situated to the respondent No.2-District Annexure P-5, which has not been nature of grievance invotved, the Qfficer is directed to consider and take r^presentation, in accordance with law, the petitioners are still aggrieved, it t^ke recourse to such remedy as may e petition is finally disposed of. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrwastavai Judge . ?1i?^T tNN'^ITc'^, <R-;)-;<P~it-T-::-I-'S.S47—2/2010—1,00,000.