(a L@ 6D IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR w.P. (S) N0. @91g5 I /2010 PETITIONERS :/ 1. Dhanesh Kuma‘r Chaturv’edi S/o Alen Ram Chaturvedi Vaishnaw Aged about 29 years shiksha karmi III, P.S. Bardi, Block- Kawardha District - Kabirdham (C.G.) Name Singh Meravi S/o Manoher Singh Meravi Aged about 36 years shiksha karmi III, P.S. Bhira, Block- Bodla, District Kabirdham (C.G.) Sewata Awasthi D/o Manmohan Awasthi Aged about 32 years shiksha karmi III, P.S. Bhira, Block- Bodla, District Kabirdharn (C.G.) Deepak kumar Banjara S/o Bhageerthi Banjara Aged about 34 years shiksha karmi III, P.S. Sarangpurkala, Block- Bodla, District Kabirdham (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS : 1. State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary, Education Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) .2. District Education Officer, kawardha,Disst:kabirdham (C.G) 3. Block education Officer, Bodla, Disst: kabirdham (C.G) WRIT PETITION U/A 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF ./ INDIA HIGH COURT OF CHHATI‘ISGARH AT BILASPUR SB : HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRI'I‘INKER DIWAKER W348) N0. 6761 [2010 PETlTlONERS Dhanesh Kumar Chaturvedi 6n Others Versus State of (LG. & Others RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONsTlTUTION OF INDIA Shri Deepak Jain, counsel for the pctiu‘oners. Shri Vaibhav Govexdhan, P.L. for the Stats. A/K ORDER (24.1 1.20 10) Grievaxice of the petitionem in this petition is that initially they were appointed as Conuact Teacher Grade III and thereafter as Shiksha Karmi Gmde III but they are not being permitted to appear for the post of Head Master on the gmund that they do not have the experience of seven yeam as Shiksha Karmi. 2. Counsel for the respondents/State submits that now the government has taken a decision to permit all those Shiksha Karmis who have the experience of seven yeals either on the post of Contract Teacher or on the post of Shiksha Karmi and therefore, there remains nothing in the ptesent petition. He has shown the letter dated 19.11.2010 issued by the Director, Public Instructions, Raipur addressed to the Advocate General. Copy of the said letter has been given to Shri Jain also and he is satisfied with the same. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the examination for the post of head l master is scheduled for 28.11.2010 85 29.11.2010 and as the petitioners apprehend that theytmay not be permitted to appear in the same, a direction may be issuedJto the competent authon'ty to permit them to appear in the said examination. 3. State counsel submits that the apprehension of the petitionem is premature and if they have duly mled in the application forms, the authoxity conccmcd would act pumuant to the decision taken by the State Government vide letter dated 19. 1 1.20 10. 4. In the facts and cimumstauces of the case, as nothing suxvives in the petition, it is disposed of with a direction to the competent authon'ty to permit the petitioners to appear in the examination to be held on 28.11.2010 7& 9.11.2010 for the st of Head Master purant to the decision ten by the State Government subject to the verihcation of the fact that the petitioners have filled in their forms and the same have been duly accepd by the authority If the glievance of the petitioners still survives, they would e t g Sd/. _ Pritiker iwaker concerned. at liberty o approach this Court. n D Judge "//, 2 po su ak te b E \\