smw BENDH WRIT PETITION N0. Ltwo [2006 C 5 ) % PETITIONER C /’;( zrO/Z/ / Shri Kishan Lal Kashyap, S/0.Shri Ram Lal Kashyap, Aged about 42 years, Working as Assistant Teacher in Government Primary School, Mehanda, Development Block District ! 5’60?! ' EE 1f?16bWm 9g em“ ‘ o . RS ESPONDENT Nawagarh, Janjgir, Janjgir—Champa (C.G.). VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, School Education Department, -D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.). The District Education Offlcer, District Janjgir—Champa (C.G.). . The Principal, Government Primary Schoo‘l, Mehanda, Development Block District Nawagarh, Janjgir, Janjg‘r—Champa (C.G.) The Collector, District Janjgir— Chama (C.G.} p 'WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 22%!227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT [ WRITS,ORDER z ORDERS,DIRECTION z DIRECTIONS IN NATURE OF WRITS OF MANDAMUS CERTIORARY OR ANY OTHER WRIT OF LIKE NATURE ETC. BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR XI—HC—78 WW,W,W wP- Wi.B/QQ. Wm E? 200 Wm (W) 311%3Wrm' wmm m m w m WW§WW %3T%tra:n%§T 31 ~8-2006 ihe pefifioner. Mr'. Ashok sani, counsel for Mr. safish 6upfa, Depuiy 6 advance copy. Heard. The only grievance raised Arricle 226/227 of the Consrituf Scheme, 2006 in case of surpius mosf Teachers are To be included per scheme. Whereas, in fhe pre 1'he pefi‘rioner, bu? Their names ha of The pefifioner has been include 'ovt Advocafe for fhe Store/respondent!” on auThoriTy as per clause-7 of Th auThoriTy is bound To consider Th found correcT according To The s Since The peTiTioner has eq Therefore, he should prefer an auThoriTy To consider The poinTs r The Time Taken by The pe shall be condoned in preferring Th WiTh The direcTion aforesa ConsequenTly, M.(W.)P.No.3 CerTified copy as per rules. by ’rhe pefi‘rioner in fhis wrif pei'i‘i'ion under on of India is fha‘l‘ as per The RaTionaiizaTion Teachers in any school, Then only The junior in The surplus lisT and To be Transferred as senT case, There are many Junior Teachers To ve noT been included in The lisT and The name i in conTravenTion of The scheme. The pefifioner has The rel nedy To file an appeal before The appellaTe raTionalizaTion scheme and The appellaTe grievance of The peTiTioner, if The same is eme, and To correcT The same. ally efficacious alTernaTive remedy available, peal before The appellaTe auThoriTy and The ised by The peTiTioner. iTioner in filing This peTiTion Till iTs disposal appeal before The appellaTe auThoriTy. d, The peTiTion sTands disposed of. 05/2006 also sTands disposed of. Sd/— i L.C. Bhadoo Judge