H§GH SQURT OF CHHATTKSGARH : BELA$PUR WHT PE'nTiON {S} NO. 242? OF 2909 PETETIGNER 3n, u :vw5n guvuu Chhattisgarh adesh Swasthva Kan; achari Ca “w“ mk Denmna Drasiaem OD. Shawa f0 Sim SP Sharma aged abcut 48 vea s R10 Piot No 136 Suudar {\agar Rmpur CG) Versus RESPONDENTS 1. State of Chhamsgarh, thmugh ihe Secreiary, Depaa'tment of Heaith & Famiiy Weifare, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (C(E 2. The Director, Department of Heaith & Family Welfare, Near DKS Bhawan, Raipur(CG). 3. Joim Birector and Suaerintenéen Dr aheem.ac Awzbedkar ”lemuha Hespated RaipuHCG). (Writ aetition under Articée 226 of the Constétution af india) “muie Bench Hen bie Shn Satish K Agnahotn J Present .- Mr N K ‘vyas counseiforihe peimcner Mr. Y.S. Thaxur, Dy. Adv. Genera: fov the State. $RAL 0Ri§ER {Passed on this 111i dav cf May, 260a) Learned counsel appearing wr the petmoner submits that the petétioner has come to knew under the provisions of the Right to mformation Act. 2005 that the State/respondents ate not complying with clause 2U 0t the terms and conditions cf ‘the advertisement dated ’l—9—2008 (Annexure —‘PI1) published for appointment on several posts. The selection for appointment on the posts as stated in the advertisement is stall in proores: Thus the submission of the pentaoner that the respondent authorities are not compivmg wrth the certain terms and conditions of the advertisement is premature, as no amenoment can be made in the advertisement once the selection process has been initiated s ~ ”2% ln View of the foregoing, the petition is liable to be and is acoordingty dismissed at the motion stage itseif, as premature. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to agitate the issue, if so advised, after seiect tist is published ignoring or vioiating the certain provision of advertisement, if any. Jl , Sd/— Satlsh K Agmhotrli Judge l Gown