^o ^QV ^' 8EK£H. x\ ^J.0-.^'.^' .sa^ ^^y^ ^i^_ (j) 1N THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR W.P.(S) No. PETITIONER RESPONDENTS /21 ^.) '-> (Z^ 72010 Pramod _Samantrai, S/o, Subliashchandra Samantrai, aged about 35 years, R/o. Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) VERSUS /l] State of Chhattisgarh, through: Secretary, Nagariya Prashasan Evurn Vikas Vibhag Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, RaipLir, District Raipur (C.G.) Director, Public Education, Chhaltisgarh, District Raipur (C.G.) 4J District Education Ol'llcer, Mahasamund, District N4ahasamu 11d (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTJON OF INDIA —78 ^iriRT ^T f<rii<=h 'cT81T 3T1^?T 9b^ich s ^^A^A__ ?^r ^ii^Kn^, ^tTi<H4i(o, f®icrii^^< ri-^..h).:f'.C$:J..^..-l?£^.?.?..., *<1*<CT1 ^^^••••••••••-^^•••••••••••----r---^^ 200 ^TT^?T T^W (^^T^T) '^RTTW^rit^ 3TT^T SB : Hon'ble Shri Manindra Mohan Shrivastava.J. cM^i<rt^1l ^W^i ^ 'fe^t <F3l<^j< ctT^tRP 3TT^?T 27-07-2010 Shri Manoj Paranjpe, counset f|orthe petitioner. Ms. Sangeeta Mishra, Panep Lawyer for the Stete/respondents on advance copy. The case of the petitioner in has taken a policy decision in fiavour <] ;his petition is ftat the State Government f the Part-Time Teachers to consider their cases for appointment to the post o|FShiksha Karmi Grade-llt and appointed large number of Part-Time Teachers Y\de order dated 08-10-2008 (Annexure P- 5). The District Education Cfficer, M^hasamund vide his memo dated 09-06- 2009 (AnnexureP-7) fon^rded the ca|se ofthe petitioner for consideration under the government policy, follo\wd by m^mo dated 07-08-2009 (Annexure P-8), of the Director, Public Instructions to th^ petitioner. tt is further submitted that ^ State Government along with a proposal for grant of appointment to numb^r of Part-Time Teachers including tiie imilarly situated Part-Time Teachers were also considered under the same polic^ and they have been granted appointment on the post of Shiksha Karmi Gra<pe-tll vide order dated 08-10-2008. It is submitted that even though such prop|osals have been made, the said proposals are pending consideration before the for the last about one year. Taking into consideration the r^ the interest ofjustice, it would be pr^ and takedecision in the case ofthe p^titioner pursuantto proposats made bythe Directorate, Public Insfructions with r^ Shiksha Karmi Grade-tll within a reas<|>nable period. With the aforesaid direction, th| respondent authority without any decision |ature ofgrievance raised in this petition, in Iper to direct respondent No.2 to consider ^ard to grant of appointment on the post of fe petition. is finally disposed off. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge