L^^Rgl&Bencff V BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION N0.4'2-!4—/2006 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS Pravin Kumar Mishra, Aged about 34 years, S/o.Shri R.R.Mishra, R/o. Shivni, Tahsil Naila Janjgir, District Janjgir- Chainpa (C.G). Working as Assistant Teacher in Govemment Priraary School, Pali, Development Block- Nawagarh, District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.). VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh,<" Through the Secretary, School Education Pepartment, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.). 2. The District Education Officer,, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). 3. The Principal, ^ Govemment Prunaiy School, Pali, Development Block Nawagarh, Janj^r, Distarict Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 4. The CoUector, r-- District Janjgir- Chainpa (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT/WRITS.ORDER/ORDERS.DIRECTION/DIRECTIONS IN NATURE OF WRITS QFL_MANDAMUS, CERTIORARY OR ANY OTHER WRIT OF LIKE NATURE ETC. fe!^sa%si^^s^^ !^» XI-HC-78 tfWyTT a^T^i s^'-^w\^, wSlww, ^vfwy. .^.W.^.h.i,. ^ 200 3TT^T<4a<h ('i^t^S.'T) sn^T^iTf^iNi gsiT 3n^?r OTW ?T(iTW(ri^(T3:n^r Shri Kishore Bhaduri, Advoccfte for- the petitioner. Shri Satish iSupta, Dy. ffovt. Heard. The only grievance raised b^ per Rationalization Scheme, 2006 i]n case of surplus teachers in any school, then only the junior- most teachers i^r'e to be included in the surplus list and to be tr'ansferred as per- scheme. Wh^reas, in the present case, there are many junior teachers to the petitioner, i^ the iist and the narne of the petitii^ner has been included in contravention of the scheme. Against this irregularity <& jl bound to consider the gr'ievance correct according to the scheme, ar^i to correct the same. Since the petitioner has available, therefore, he should || authon'ty and the authority to consi] The time taken by the petit shall be condoned in preferr'ing the i W/ith the direction ofor'esaid, +i<iiF<'i41-< t<ii(iTffteI^t<Ri'wi< ^sri^iTsn^r Adv. for the State on advance copy. the petitioner in this petition is that as ut their nomes have not been included in igality committed by the respondents, the petitioner has the remedy to file ai|) appeal before the appellate authorjty as per clause-7 of the r'ationalizatio^i scheme and the appellate authQrity is if the patitioner-, if the same 'is found equaliy efficacious alternative remedy ir-efer an appeal before the appellate Ber the points raised by the petitioner. bner in filing this petition till its disposal [tppeal before the appellate authority. the petition stands disposed of. Consequently, M.(W.)P. No.32p'0/06 also stdnds disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- L.C.Bhadoo Judge ^