.LN .LriE HILIh COURJ. OF C H'X ISGABH A \EUR w.P .No.__>_:__5:__/2oo1 P Eli; EONEj 3 L oknath ’\ S/O Him Plasad, Am w aged about 26 ygafs, Guruji at E.G.S. Canter MW “ Anusuchit JatirPaIa, Bahod R/o Viuage— Bahod P.S. Eahod via. Krarod,i‘ézsil- Pamgarh, Janj gir Ckanpa. - Versus - gEsPONDmTs bstate of cmattisgarh Through the Secretary Departmmt of Panchayat Mantialaya. , SIEstI‘i Chowk , Raipur. Mew. ef‘ Ececutiv e Offic er, Janpad Panchayat Pamgarh Pamg rh , Janj gir Ckanpa. wamgmlrlow mIDg_ARIICLEs_.gg_6/g22 OF m goxa'STxTUTLN OF mDIA FOR ISSUAME OF A gmT IN um NA mm; OF MANDAMUS cmfggRARx , wom 1Q Erc. AND FOR IssvAivr‘E OF SUHABLE Blammusoa aaDg Eg. mm \; \‘ r b Education Guarantee Scheme ( \ ~ “w Itiis submitted that been relieved as per Annexu Shri Pandey. G.A. su 3,. 4" ) fficer in the Education first Guruji was also not that the report of the re the committee and the of the Guruji and the Coll- the District Mission h i shiksha Mission also Second Guruji and as such m the post of ,Guruji‘ vide counsel for the petitioner. Shri Mashant Jaiswal, Shri Rajesh Pandey. G..A. for the state/Respondents. In this case notice m s issued to respondents on 20.04. 2001. Return has been filedi on behalf of Respondent No. 2- ‘Janapad Panchayat. ?amgarh. where the petitioner was working. stated that on an inspection v In the return. it is \ made by the Block Education Guarantee centre and that woman. It is further state inspection was submitted be committee recomme nded remov actor, who also happens to Director u‘nder the Rajiv G wrote for the removal of t the petitioner was removed ’ order dated 12. 11.99. petitioner has already P/a dt.12.11.99. ts that paragraph 5 of nnexure P/l) is relevant {slew o¢2t 0 t d f a b a‘ he f o e i mmEe£g§93§§§l£991 200 m manmm aft?! emWnm“(man a;amm 1 7. 1 1 . 2003 O ‘ 2O mm @m $aafaam to the efiect that Gutujis uld-have preferred an appel against their grievan s. He further submits that the petitioner had not done Counsal for the peti ioner submits that the main grievance of the petitioner WWW thatthe payment o£ salary irem 15.1 01998 to 12.1101 Le. about 11 rigonths has not been paid to the petit involved in this petition. the same is disposed of f 11y with the consent of counsel for parties. dering the facts and circum— stances of the case and wi ut expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, in of justice will be served pondents that if the petit detailed representation al to the Competent Authority i£ such representation is e. the same shall be consig- m d possible preferably within o p meritsxin accordance with hf 9 9 ner a Since a short questi Having heard and con t o e £ S i v o i opinion-of this Court. ends n directdén is given to resw er is makega with a cOpy of this petition thin 6 weeks from today and dered and decided by the c atent Authority as early as 2 weeks thereafter on its A Sdl- Fakhruddin Judge / {new i l a o i n 1 i t n g