IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR .^?. WRIT PETITION (S) No~ Of 2007 ^v'^ vf^ PETITIONER :.. Mohammad Safdar Khan, p-<^^ s/o l-ate shri Ahmad Kha"' €?>:^ys''..--" A9ed about 69 years. Retired ADIS'ward No'8 ^•^%.V""" stafon para. Rainandgaon, (C.G.)^ ^••-y^:" " ...-••" VERSUS :.w ^ RESPONDENTS :1. The State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary , School Education, Department, Mantralay D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG)., The Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Chhattisgarh, Bayron Bazar,Raipur (CG). The District Education Officer, District Rajnandgaon (CG). Joint Director, Treasury Accounts and Pension, Raipur (CG). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OFINDIA HIGH_CQU_RT_QF CHHATriSGARH ; BILASPUR Wnt Petition fS) No. 6567 of 2007 Petitioner Mobamaiad Safdar Khaa Versus Respondents The State of Chhattisgarh & ofhers (Writ Petition under Article 226 ofthe Constitution oflndia) (SB: Hon'ble ShriSatish K. AgnihotdJ.) Shri Rakesh Anfhony, Advocate for fhe petitioner. Shri A. V, Shridhar, Paael Lawyer for fhe respondents/State. O RD E R (oralt ( Passed on this 9th day ofMarch, 2010) Heard. 1. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner sutomits that the petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction ou the part of fhe rcispo ;' ' , as the petitioner was not grauted fhe benefit of second tune bound advancement (Kramonnati) after coiapletion of 8 yeara of service .frota tfae date of grant of fii^t time bound advanceineat. He furfher submits that fhe case of fhe petitioaer is covered by the order dated 28^ Januaiy, 2008, passed by fhis Court ia W.P.(S) No. 574/2008 (Gauri Shankar Sharma Vs. The State of Chhattisgarh & others). 2. Learaed coiinsel appeariag for the respondents/State submits fhat fhe petitioner may file a representation to the concemed aufh.ority to consider his case iu the light of the order passed ia Gauri Shaakar Stiarma (supra). 3. In view of fhe foregoing, fhe petition stands disposed of with Uberty to the petitioner to Baak-e a representation to fhe concemed authority iu the light of fhe order passed by fhis Court ia Gauri Shankar Sharma (supr^, which may be considered and decided by fhe coiapetent auttiorily, in accordance vrith law, withm a reasoiiable period. No order asto costs. Sd/- Thataa Satish K.Agnihocri Judge