C/^\'v^ ^IMf'^ ^. K^^F.''" wwsLK. SkK!>M IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.) W.P.S.NO. ST'^s /10 PETITIONER Madan lal Gurdwan ,S/o Late Ishwer Prasad, aged about 44 years, UDC, Gramya Bhariti Vidyapith, Hardi Bazar, Korba (C.G.) RESPONDENTS VERSUS : 1: State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department ofHigher Education, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) ft^ ^^ ^:52 %-y 2. Director, Higher Education, Directorate ^J,.--y^,^\ 3'. Shashtri Shikshan SamitiThroughits Secretary,Gramya Bharti Vidyapith (Mahavidyalaya) Hardi Bazar, Korba (C.G.) ;y •i;!l^^'s%$\ ! ! 1:; 5-v/"-~<v^\ ' . '^'WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF \ ^H. ^f ? L" ^S^J]§1 ^&^ INDIA ^y8% HiGH COURT QF'aiHATnSGARH AT BILASPUR 8B : HON'BLE 8HRI JUSTICE PRITiNKBRDIWAKBR W.P.jSl N0. 5793/2010 PBTITIONER Madan Lal Guriwan Versus RESPONDENTS State ofC.G. & Ofhers WRIT PBTmON UNDBR ARTSCLB 326 OF THE CONSTITUTION Shri Neeraj Choubey, counsel for the petitioner. Shri V.V.S.Moorthy, Dy. A.G. for the State/resps. 1 & 2. ORDER (07.10.2010) Grievance of tbe petitioner in the present petition is fhat he is the eiaployee of Govenunent Aided private educatioiial institution and though he is cntitled for flie benefit of 6*h Pay ComLinission as recoiiunended by the Gtovenuuent for tlie pvenunent ejnployees but fhe same has not been given to hira. According to fhe petitioner earUer also when the benefit of 5th Pay Coinnussion was refased to petitioner and smularty placed persons, writ petitions were ffled beforc fhis Court and ultiiaately after passiag of oider by fhis Court the benefit of 51-11 Pay Coinxaission was granted to thein. 2. Counsel for fhe petitioner subiaits fhat ends of justice would be scrved if at this stage the petitioner is pennitted to withdraw this petition and direction be issucd to the respondent N0.1 for deciding the pendiug representation of the petitioner (Amiexure P/5) dated 11.6.2010. 3. Counsel appearing for the State submits that the representation has been niade by the petitioner direcfly to the Chief Minister whereas he is required to niake suitable representation to respondent N0. l. He subuiits fhat the case of (§) fhe petitioner and similarly placed persons for grant of 6dl Pay Comiaission is already under consideration and let fhe petitioner inake a fresh representation and the saine wouM be decided in accordance with law. 4. Accordiugly, the petitioner is permitted to withdraw tliis petition wifh ttae aforesaid liberty. In fhe eventuality of filmg a fi-esh representation by the petitioner before fhe rcspondent N0.1 wifhin a period of one inontii f[ova. ffae date of receipt of copy of this order, it is expected froin fhe said authorities to pass appropriate order as expeditiously as possible prefeiably wittun a period offour nionths fix)tii tfae date of its receipt. 5. It is niade clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on nierits of fhe case and the authoritv concerued would be at Uberty to decide the saiue stricfly in accordance wifh law. —— —-- Sd/- Pritinker Diwakar Judge 1