^ y-s^ ^yy\y.-'- ^'3^>A^ ^^y ^:^^" A-;^ ^RST TTFT;f^T ^DcT -qlqidZT felcii^q^ y^^^co (^Q'ITO) W.P.tCt No. /201Q qirqcMcr?aI ^ca><ciiqi<|u| ^ ^^ 1^T§Tut'^lPlR:l, Rldl^H^ (^07TO), ^BT:;^^ - ^-^ -qN 3TTO ^TO ^ft ^Jr WTK TN, ^^ ^PT^PT 55 ~^, Ptcii^ 'o^lRh^llM "^PT^, TT^T STTcTTH, [eldl^y^ (E?OTTO) f^^<£l 1. y>all^1'll(o ^TRT'T, ^T^T - ^TcT, ^cf^ T^T f^TSTT f^TPT, ^t.'c^.'^T. r>TcFT, ^T?iy ('E?OTTO) 2. ^raT^r^, ^T^ ^tfto sT^^fm^ ^ ^TST^T ^^, ^fc^ ^mp?, ^PT^? (B5'OTTO) fe ^lfqcM 3ia4a SI^T^CJ 226 ^TR^N <d'^l-l HiGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BiLASPUR WRIT PETIT10N (0 No. 3831 of2010 PETiTiONER . : Suraj Shikshan Samiti, Biiaspur. VERSUS RESPONDENTS : State of Chhattisgarh & another. WR!T PETiTiON UNDER ARTiCLE 226 OF THE CONSTiTUTION OF iNDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Aanihotr!. J. Present: Shri C.K.Kesharwani, Advocate for the petifioner. Shri A.V.Shridhar, Panel Lawyer forthe State/respondents. (ORAU (Passed on 26th day of Juiy, 2010) 1. By this petition, the petitsoner seeks to chaljenge the communication dated 26.05.2010 (Annexure P/1) and the directions and guidelines wlth regard to B.Ed. admission, wherein two different institutions nameiy Shashkiya Shiksha Mahavldyaiaya, Raipur, and Shashkjya Shiksha Mahavidyaiaya, Biiaspur have been directed to begin the coursevv.e.f 01.07.2010. 2. Learned counse! appearing for the petitioner draws attention of the Court to page No. 7 of the papers, whereln the name of the petitioner-jnstitute does not find piace. On query asto whether the petitioner has approached the Director, State Councii for Education Research & Training (forshort 'SCERT'), Shankar Nagar, Raipur, for continuation of the seats of B.Ed course allotted to the petitioner- instltute, Shri Kesharwani categoricaliy states that it is not necessary to approach the authorities. 3. On perusa! of the communication dated 26.05.2001 (Annexure P/1), it Is dear that the same is addressed to Shashkiya Shiksha Mahavidyaiaya, Raipur, and Shashkiya Shiksha Mahavidyaiaya, ^^^ ^' "\ l.j ^f^ -2-- Bilaspur, and not to the petitioner. There is aiso no document on record which shows that the petitioner has been restrained from running B.Ed. course. The petitioner impugns the communication dated 26.05.2010 (Annexure P/1) issued by the Director, SCERT, to the Principal, Shashkiya Shiksha Mahavidyaiaya, Raipur and Shashkiya Shiksha Mahavidyalaya, Bilaspur, wherein there is no adverse order against the petitioner-institute. The abovestated communication cannot be quashed at the instance of the petitioner without impieading Shashkiya Shiksha Mahavidyalaya, Raipur and Shashkiya Shiksha Mahavidyaiaya, Bllaspur as necessary parties. 4. Thus, for want of material facts and further that the relief sought for In this petitlon is vague disciosing .no cause of actlon, no reiief can be granted to the petitioner. 5. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed at the motlon stage itself. Amil Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge