HIGH COURT OF CHHA’I‘TISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition No. 2240 of 2005 Petitioner: Versus Respondents: ‘ Munnalal Chandra, son of Shri Bharat Lal Chandra, aged about 22 years, resident of Gram Panchayat Salni, occupation Samvida Shikshak — Grade III, Senduras, District Janjgir— Champa (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, through — the Secretary, Panchayat, Rural and Welfare Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Gram Panchayat — Senduras, through ~ Its Sarpanch, Janpad Panchayat — Jaijaipur, District Janjgir — Champa (CG) The " Sub Divisional Officer (Rev.),. Sakti, District Janjgir _Champa (CG) Additional Collector, Distt. Janjgir—Champa (C.G.) Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Janjgir-Charnpa (CG) Secretary, Committee, Gram Panchayat, Janpad Panchayat — Distt. Janjgir — Champa (CG). Block Education Officer, Block — Jaijaipur, Distt. Janjgir— Champa (Chhattisgarh) Yuvraj Sahu, R/o. village Senduras, Tah. Jaijaipur, Distt. Janjgir — Champa (CG) WRIT PETITON UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Ms Pushpa Dwivedi, Advocate for the petitioner. and 7. Shri P. K. Bhaduri, Panel Lawyer for the respondents No. 1, 3, 4 Shri Pankaj Shrivastava, Advocate for the respondents No. 2 85 5. Shri Amiyakant Tiwari, Advocate for the respondent No.8. Single Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri. O R D E R (Passed on this 18th day df July, 2008) 1. The petitioner, by this petition, impugns the order dated 26.5.2005 (Annexure P/4) passed by the respondent No.4 Additional Collector, Janjgir Champa, in Revision Case No. Ol/B- 121 /2004—05 (Yuvraj Sahu Vs. Munnalal). g; 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was awarded 25 marks for knowledge of the local language as per Annexure A/ l. The said marks did not find place in the final select list and the respondent No.8, who obtained lesser marks, was appointed on the post of contract Teacher Grade-III in the Gram Panchayat Senduras, Janpad Panchayat Jaij aipur. 3. I have perused the original papers produced by the respondent No.2. In the register maintained by the Gram Panchayat Senduras (at page 32 — 33), no marks on account of knowledge of local language has been awarded to the petitioner. The petitioner in m total obtained 42. 1%, whereas, the respondent No.8 obtained 65.2 marks and one Shiv Shankar son of Bhagatram obtained 70.4% marks. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 2 and 5 that since said Shiv Shankar declined the appointment, therefore the second person from the list i.e. the respondent No.8, who obtain 65.2% marks was found fit and accordingly, he was appointed on the post. The Additional K Collector in his order dated 26.5.2005 (Annexure P/4), has @ considere th facts in etail. It appears that the Additional Collecto has also seen the original documents and found that the : who obtalned 70 4% marks and declned the appomtmen Thus, > the appomtment of the respondent N 8 s found legal and proper 5. The contention of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that, ‘ as the marks shown in the examination memo ( 1) 1 1g d e Annexure A/ were not recorded n the or1na1 recor therefor the peioner was dened the appomtment on the post of otract tti l cn Teacher 6. Having heard learned counsel for the appearing pares and haxng perused the pleangs and documents appended theret appears that no marks was awarded to the peoner on account of knowledge of local language. . Be that as it may, since the documen shown as Annexure A/ 1, according to learned counsel appearing for the respondents N 2 and s alleged to be a forged dcumen it requr necessary prob $ Accordingl the Collector, Janir Champa s drected to examine the facts of the case and take appropriate steps as K£ required under law. 8. With the above direction the matter stands disposed of No order Sd/- l Satish K. Agnihotri l Judge l , r . g as to costs Thakur d e d r i t o wa ti v di o it titi t o 5 i ot ies e y jg i i