../^-hLF^i^ ,*<'-;^A."'°'%, .<''' f?""~^'i "^ .-? s. M ^^'^i^^ 3^-viWn! ^Sff 3Bt% W*(i3(? /<z^/ 'S^ •^wm<i, gnlwis, Ta|cil<-f^'t 3ii^i^ra?(yf3^tr> ^aw^ftasn^i Wlf?rfN •WRlf 4 fls^ •^I^IT ^sffimai'tf Smt. 1 Rukhmani Sahu, wife of Shri Prem w^~ Prakajsh Sahu, aged about 27 years, resident of vfflag^ aad post Jalshaiikarra, Tah.. Charama, Distt.|Kauker(CG) 2. 3. State | of Chhattisgarh, fhrough Secretaiy of Paachayat Evam Grainia Vikas Vibh^, Dau Kalyan Siugh Bhawan, Maiitifalaya, Raipur (CG) CoUecjtor, Distt- Kanker (CG) The (phief Executive Of&cer, ZUa Panchayat, Kauk^r (CG) WRITPETITION UltDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ,J. Shri Vinay Pandey, co^uisel for the petitioner. Shri Arun Sao, Gov-t, 4dvocate for fhe State. Heard. j Grievance of the petiljiouer is that for recruitm.ent of 2 posts of Shiksha Karmi Grade-I imd^r fhe OBC categoiy for subject 'Geography', vacancy was advertised by t|ie respondent No.3 vide Annexure P-4. Out of fhe above 2 posts, 1 wa^ reserved for female candidate. The Chief Executive Officer, Districtj Paachayat, North Bastar, Kanker vide lueinoranduxn of AaiiexT.u-ejP-5, dated 16th Juae 2008, ia&rmed fhe petitioner that her nam.e h^s been included ia fhc merit list aad she was called upon to reportjon 25th June 2008 along with necessaiy •'iaaic—vs ^\ '^^ '^wiw, y^y'iy, faMi'H^ «(p<ciFg»w% w^y; w -i1+ wnsii^win? s^t^V (.^y^) TOIW ^iter ailSsi -2 q)l<ftt!ft^1'T tfP^f ^* 1^t€t>Xf^^iT iT3ffin<ffl%?t testmionials for its verifica4on. She appeared on fhe given date, her testuaonials were found ia (jirder after veri&cation. However, thereafter, w^ • • she has not jreceived any coquaunication regarcLuig her appomtinent, The •pttitioner has fcready submitted her representation of Annexure P-*6, dated 4.f.2008 iu this regard. However, her representation has also not Tjieeu decided tUl date. '•^f^i- Leamed counsel for ft^e State submits that ia case the petitioner files a fresh represeutatioii fi[>r redressal of her gnevances, ralsed ui this writ petition, before the res^ within a period of one weekj and decided within a furthi oadent No.3 along wifh copy of this order, froin today, the same shall be considered ;r period of fhree weeks fi-om. fhe date of rcceipt offhe representationj In view of the above sjubnussion of leamed couiisel for the State, this petition is disposed of|yi£h. Uberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation for redressa^ of her grievances before fhe respondent No.3 aloag wifh a copy of thp.s order withia a week froia today. On such representation being laade, by fhe respondent No.3 ia ai( a furfher period of three representation. the same shaU be considered and decided •cordaace wifh law on its own inerits withia weeks from. fhe^ date of receipt pf fhe DhirendraMishra Judge