1, v W age HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WriT PetWion (5) No. 946 of 2009 PETITIONERS Suresh Kumar’ Mafhur', S/o Shr'i San’r Ram, aged abouT 34 years, by' cas’re . Sa‘rnami (Scheduled Cas‘re), residem of village Laipur, Tahsii Lor‘mi' Dis‘rr‘ic’r Bilaspur‘ (CG) SmT‘ Ram Kumari Ra‘rhor‘e W/o Shri Mumr'i Lal Rufhor‘e, aged abouf 44 years, by casTe Ra‘rhore, OTher \ Backward Class Communi’ry, residenf of ViHage and Posf Sarkhond, DisTrice Janjgir Champa (6.6.) 3. Ku. Shashi Jafwar D/o Shri Mani Ram, aged abouT 25 years, by cas’re Ja‘rwar, Scheduled Casle, residen‘r of Village Dofma, Block Jaijaipur', Tahsil Hasaud, DisTricT Janjgir Champa (C.G.). 4. Sml. Sandhya Parihar, W/o Shri Sunil Kumar Parihar, aged aboul 28 years, residem‘ of Juna Bilaspur, Tahsil & Dis‘rric’r Bilaspur (CIEn) Versus RESPONDENTS 1. The Sfa‘re of ChhaTTisgarh, Through The Secrefar’y, Depar’rmem‘ of Panchayal & Social Welfare, Man‘rr‘alay .aJr';D.K,s, Bhawan, Raipur (ca) 2. The Direclor Panchaya‘r & Social Welfare Depar’rmem‘, Raipur (C.G.) The Coec’ror‘, Bilaspur (C.G.) ll Chief Execufive Officer, Janpad 'Panchaya'l‘, Masfuri, Disfric’r Bilaspur (C6) , WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ) Single Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Jus‘rice Safish K.Agnihofr'i. Present Shri Rakesh An’rhony, counsel for ’rhe pefh‘ioner‘s. Ms. Smifa Ghai, P.L. for The STaTe/responden’rs. ORDER g0RAL) (Passed on 26* Day of June‘ 2009)‘ Heard. 2. Grievance of ’rhe pefi‘rioners in This pe‘fi‘rion is Tha'r The pe‘ii‘rioner‘s pcr’ricipm‘ed in The examina’rion conduc’red for recruifmem‘ of Shiksha Karmi Gradevlll, however, Their names did noT find piace in The iisT of seiecTed condidoTes Though They had obTained requisiTe marks for appoinTmenT. On enquiry, They iearnT ThaT Their names were noT menTioned in The seiecTed iisT as They had noT marked DeEd. Column in Their applicaTions. SubSequenTly, on Their represenTaTion Their case for appoinTmenT was considered and ciarificaTion was soughT from The DirecTor, PanchayaT To The effecT ThaT The candidaTes, who are residenTs of STaTe of ChhaTTisgarh and have done Their D. Ed, CourSe ouTside The STaTe, may be appoinTed as Shiksha Karmi Grade-III or noT. The DirecTor, PanchayaT in repiy To The above query vide memo of Annexure P—12 addreSSed To The Chief ExecuTive Officer, Zila PanchayaT, Bilaspur sToTed ThaT if The adverTisemenT for recruiTmenT does noT yfoh‘ibiT-«The residenTs of ChhaTTisgarh who had done Their D.Ed. course ouTside The STaTe, in ThaT case They can be considered for appoinTmenT. However, The cases of The peTiTioners for appoinTmenTs have been deferred in anTicipaTion of guidance. 3. _ Learned counsel for The peTiTioners submiTs ThaT despiTe clear direcTion from The DirecTor, PanchayaT in This regard The peTiTioners have been deprived from consideraTion for \\ appoinTmenT. He furTher submiTs ThaT he is noT pressing This \ pefh‘ion a‘r This s‘rage, however, The peti’rioners may be permi‘r‘red To file fresh represenTaTions before responden’r No.4 and in Tum, responden’r No.4 may be direc‘red ‘ro consider The case of The peTiTioners for appoinTmenT wiThin specified period. 4. On The oTher hand, learned counsel for The STaTe submiTs ThaT in case The peTiTioners file fresh represem‘aTion for redressal of Their grievance before respondenT No.4, The same shall be considered and decided wiThin a period of Three weeks from The daTe of receipT of The represenTaTions. 5. In view of The above submission of learned counsel for The parTies, The insTanT peTiTion is disposed of wiTh liberTy To The peTiTioners To make fresh represenTaTion along wiTh This peTiTion and cerTified copy of This order before respondenT No. 4 for redressal \of Their grievances raised in This peTiTion and on such represenTaTion being made, The respondenT No.4 is direcTed To consider and decide The same in accordance wiTh law‘ wiThin a period of Three weeks from The daTe of receipT of The represenTaTion. 6. ConsequenTly, I.A. No.1, applicaTion for inTerim relief also sTands disposed of. Satish K. Agnihot Kvr Judge rgi