c^\^q^ S8NGLE BENCH IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.(S.) N0. Sfcfc^- 72010 PETITIONER ^' \^'" ^><", fi^^? '.•^:.>\(3>-" ^^ <*:> '^ Banmali Prasad Sidar S/o Late Shri Tilo Ram Sidar, Aged about 61 years, Lecturer (History) Hemsunder Gupta Government Higher Secondary School, Mahapalli Tahsil & District Raigarh (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS ^'"?7^ ^ ~~ \J^.. ;\^ 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through : The Secretary, School Education Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Director /Commissioner Lok Shikshan Sanchnalaya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ^" _. . . • 3. District Education Officer, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) 4. The Principal Hemsunder Gupta, Government Higher Secondary School, Mahapalli, Tahsil 85 District Raigarh (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER_ ARTICLE 226 OF THE •CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN NATURE OF MANDAMUS CERTIORARY OR ANY OTHER WRIT OF LIKE NATURE ETC. —78 fe^SS^ 311^1 ^T fs^NT ^T^T W^T sfi^J^ WWfS l»»*18cb 'y^r ^I^II^<LJ, ^-ai^^<o, [^<n8^^< __.:.^.:.£...CS?....^.C.G.^/..J.2•^200 3TI^T1^^ («i°li^<«r) ^^TW^^3>??^[ 8B_^HON»BLBMR. JUSTICB UTIMKER DIWAKER 01.10.2010 Shri D.R.Patel, counsel fc^ Smt. Smita Ghai, P.L for t Coiinsel for fhe petitio^i permitted to withdraw fhe pre^ representation before fhe resp| direction raay be issued to fhej said representation m fhe Ughjt passed by this Court in W.P.(S) AccordiD.gly, fhe petition fhe petitioner before respondentl is expected from the respond| considermg all fhe factaal aa< expeditiously as possible, It is made clear that fhis opinion on merits of the case woiild be at Uberty to decide the stdcflv ia accordaace wifh law. ^^?d4!-i 'HF^f "^ 'fe^ ^l^K ^ SffiR 3R^T fhe petitioner. le State. ?r submits that he may be ant petition with liberly to ffle mdent No.2, He subinits that respondent No,2 to decide fhe offhe order dated 4.11.2008 to. 6098/2008. Counsel for the State sub^aits fhat let the petitioner mafce a representation befbre respon^ent N0.2 and fhe same would be decided after due verific^tion of fhe fact and after scrutmizmg fhe entire case. is dismissed as withdraw with the liberty a^s ajforesaM.'% In th€ eventualitf^f inakjing aoy such rcpresexitation by No.2 raising aU tds grievance, it bnt No.2 to decide fhe same legal aspect of the case as Court has not expiiessed aay and the auffaority concemed Irepresentatioii of the petitioner Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge