r^ v c^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATUREAT BILASPURCHHATTISGARH WRIT PETITION N0 ^?<i OF 2004 1\ ^•^' ]%>^> ^-@^" .yy^ -.^o·''-^.'^&·'l'" ^y V ;S/0 SiHRI SUNDER LAL DEWANGAN, AGEiD ABOUT 33 YEARS ! OCCUPATION-ASSITTENT TEACHER, GOVEERNMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL, KESALA, BLOCK- NAVAGAR , DISTfRICT-JANJGEER-CHAMPAfC.G.) VERSES RESPONDENTS •M'toA ^* \u 1.STA.TE OF CHHATTISGARH ,THF:iOUGH : SECRETARY SCHOOL EDIUCATION DEPARTMENT, D.K. BHAVAN RAIPUR (C.G.) 2, DIS.TRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER .JANUGEER- CHAMPA (C.G) 3; BLtOCKEDUCATIONOFFICER BLOCK -NVAGAR,(JANNGEER) DIS;TT -JANJGEER- CHAMPA (C.G) WRIT PETIT10NJJJWER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^ETAILS OF THE PETITION 1. RARTICULARS OF TH E PETITIONER : As mentioned in the Cause Title above. > w HIGH COURT OF eHHATTISGARH. BILASFUR W.P.No. 3768/a>04 Kanta Prasad Dewangan Vs. Slate of Chtiattisgarh and others W.P.No. 3698/2004 Dwarika Prasad Kashayp Vs. State of Chliattisgarh aad ofhers W.P. No.3734/2004 BaU. Ram Dewangan Vs. Stateof Chhattisgarh and others W.P. No.3997/2004 Oin Prakash Patel Vs. State of Chhattisgarh aiid others Appearance: Dl'. ShaUeshAhuja, counsel for the petitioners. Shri Satish Gupta, Dy. Goveitunent Advocate for the State/ respoudents. ORAL ORDER (12.10.2006t SUNIL KUMARSINHA. J. Byway ofthese wnt petitions, filed under Article 226^227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioiiers have prayed for a direction to fhe respondeiits tp pay fhe uicreineiits &nd couiit seniority on fhe basis of their uutial appoiQtDients-ui Ught 6f the > :.^ decision rendered by the leamed State Adiiuiustrative Tribunal, Jabalpur m O.A.No. 1452/1998 (Harish Chaudra Singh & othera Vs. State ofM.P. & others) dated 31.1.2000. During the coui-se of argunients, fcamed counsel for fhe petitioners subnuts that in inany writ petitious filed by the suiulariy placed persons, fhis Court has issued directioas for m.aking representatious before the coinpetent authorily aad fhe coinpetent authorily has been directed to decide fheir representations wifhiu fhe stipulated period graated by this Coiirt. He furfher subinits fhat those wiit petitioas are W.P.No.4926/2006 and W.P.No.3883/2006. He makes a limited prayer that these petitions inay also be disposed of with a direction. to flie petitioiiers to file a detailed representation. before the conipetent authorily and the competent aufhority may be directied to dispose ofthe sanie in accordance wifh law. This liinited pi-ayer, niade by leanied couasel for fhe petitioners is not opposed by leamed counsel for fhe State. Having heard learued coiiusel for ttie parties aud having regard to the facts and circuiastances of the case, in the opinion of this Court; fhe lunited prayer m.ade by leanied counsel for fhe petitioners appears to be reasonable. The prayer is aUowed. The petitioaers are allowed to niake a detailed representation vrifhin a period of 1wo weeks from today to fhe concenied aufhoryy, raising aU titieir grievauces and if such a representotion is filed; in tem, fhe con.cei-ned authorily shall decide the said representation iu aa. objective Hiannei^witlun a period of 30 days from. tfae date of receipt of the represeatation after consideruig aU fhe points raised by fhe petitioners aud takirtg into acGOunt the order dated 31.1.2000 passed by fhe leained State Aditunistrative Tribunal, Jabalpiir in O.A.No. 1452/1998. With the aforesaid directions, all fhe writ petitions staad finaUy disposed of. No order as to cost. Parties are entitled for certtfied copy ofthis order. Sd/- Sm«lKu^rsinha sunita