f / ' CW/ Division much / 1‘ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT EILASPUR( CHE‘ TISGARHI Le i4 } OF 2003 Rajendra Kumar Verma, son of Shri Kedar Nat‘n Verma, aged about 39 years, Occupation—Nil, , resident o£ near Allahabadi Hotel, Chatedihp$eepat RDad,Bilaspur(C.G,) WRIT PETI‘T‘ ION NOa PETITIONER .o I<: F5 ”U U]E G 0)I i RE SP DNDENTS n ,l_ n State of Madhya Pradesh: tliough: E3 ecret ary , Dep ar'tment of school Eoucation,Vallabh Bhawan,Bhopal, (M.P.) The Director/Commissioner, Public Instructious,3hopal, (M.P.) DeVaILand Namdeo: Lecturer,in Government Hiqher' Secondary School.Dongargai‘h, District Rajnandgaon,(c.G,) iatate of Chhattisgarh‘through $ecretary,Department of School EducatiorhD,K.S.Bhawan: IVIantralaya,Raig)ur, (C. G.) 5. The State Administrative Tribunal, through its Registrar’PrinCipal, Benchdeocllgur, (Madhya Pradeah) . .- N o .. p. . u Emmi permit»: UNDER ARTxCLEs 22% 221 QF’N'HE 9/ CONSTXTUTION 6F INDIA; X’ i IGH COURT QF CHHATTI$GARH AT BELASPI‘JR V\/.P. No. 1647. 0f 2003 Pet§ticmer : Rajendra Kumar Verma Versus Respondents State of Madhya Prade$h (Now CG)&Others Writ Petition under Artiole 226/227 of the Constitution of indie V» x ,,. DB: Hon’bte Shri Justice LM. Quddusi & Hon’bie Shri Justice N. Kl AqarwaL Present : Shri RK Kesharwani, Advocate for the petitioner‘ Ms. Deepati Pandey, Panel Lawyer forthe Sta e. ORAL. QRDER (Passed on 13‘“ day of August, 2%1t3) Per LM. Quddusi, J“ 1. This petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 16.04.2002, passed by the State Administrative Tribunai (for short ‘SAT’) in OA No. 2667/2000, with a prayer for a direction to the respondent to awrd weightage marks for teaching experience of 90 months to the petitioner and regular the petitioner as Lecturer Store Keeping rade, [and in the T alternative direcion to consider the candidature at the netitioner t v for the post of Lcrer in the suject of ccountancy, Banking etu b A Asstt. & Co-operative Managment etc. e Brief fats of the case are that, an adverement was made for c tis filling up different poste. The petione appe for the noete of tir lid Accountanc, Store Keeping, Office Manement, Co-oneretive y ag Management and Banking Ase. His grivance is that he has tt e not been awarded apprriate marks fo working experience! op r H s a wr’ i 4 :5”, ‘ {if He has annexed his experience certificate (Annexure PM) which is reproduced as under: e. $§ wmwwaaW?mfi#$m' 7e§3m% g3 $ 1%weemhawm ?&ar é? aw 1m; 1 wag—en WW1? 3n3.m.i% 06.01.90 15,0390 4.1a m%m% k mg 2 199w91 m — 01.07.90 I 30.06.91 12 $5 3 1991—92 weer — 01.07.91 15.05.92 111013.15 4 1992—93 m%w¥a — 01.07.92 l15.05.93 15.05.94; $15 5 1993—94 arm 00Gri¥a e 01.07.93 t15.05.95 $5 6 1994~95 WW — 01.07.94 :13!) 7 1995—96 . m Itiwi'z — i 01.07.95 , 15.05.96 112:5 s 1996—97 mfiiiwia — 01.07.96 l30.04.98 1111‘? 9 1997—98 31092199971913 — 01.07.97 9e 3. in the return, the experience of the petitioner in the field. of Accountancy has been mentioned from 06.01.90 to 15.05.90, 01 .0790 to 30.06.91 and thereafter from 01.07.91 to 15.05.92 ..i.e. about 26 months was counted and the rest of the period he was in the Office Management which cannot be counted towards Accountancy. The same wouid be counted towards the Office Management. I To our opinion, the reasons given for non—counting experience i of 90 months total is just and reasonahie. There was different posts in the advertisement and therefore, experience was to he counted for different posts. Therefore, we do not find any case in favour of the petitioner to interfere in‘the impugned order passed by the SAT. 5. ‘ in the resuits, the petition is dismisse: Niorder asto costs. ii 7 ' sdl— _ ‘i "M:]Qulédg‘:USI i1 N.K.§Adg/rawal i i Judge