IN THE HIGH COURTJ)FLBLLASPUR,AT CHHATTISGARH WRIT PETITION (St No. S3\^ QF 2010 PETITIONERS y ^!.- ;;%. :1. ^^^.^^"I...-- .-'-:.:. &A'iv-"""""L.. »*ri'->"......^•-••"""" ^^^-^ •• ^^ Ram Gopal Patel, S/o. Shri Purushottam Patel, aged about 40 years, Occupation Service (Vyyam Shikshak), Govt. Higher Secondary School, Madanpur, Block Kharsia, Distt. Raigarh, (C. G.) RESPONDENTS Bal Krishna Dansena, S/o. R. N. Dansena, aged about 46 years, Occupation Service fVyyam Shikshak), Govt. Higher Secondary School, Mura, Block Kharsia, Distt. Raigarh, (C. G.) VERSUS 1) State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Secretary, Tribal and Welfare Department, D. K. S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C. G.) 2) Commissioner,Directorate of Public Instruction, Chhattisgarh D.K.S. Bhawan D-. K. S.-Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C. G.) 3) Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Raigarh, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) WRI5LPETTnONUNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^s. sn^r w R;-ii<* 3^ "^PTRT^, '3'^FIS, ^dl-H^ ,.^^)i.^....^3.%).ll 3(1^11R^T ('jqi^yi) 'Raim^ftggn*^ SB: Hori'bieShniHaninura^moii 29.07.2010 ynn Ajay i\umar BariK, cour ivls. Sanaeeta Iviishra, Par aavance CODV. pei TOI' tne petitioners. ei Lawvsr ror ine Grievance of the petitioners &S S8t Out iFi IFliS petiiion is tnat tnougn irie peirooners nave oecorne eiigiDie post of Lecturer, pursuant to rnern Director, Pubiic instructions, Confidentia! Reports were sent foi promotion has been taken, tiil date. Learned counsel for the continuing in service as Spoils T and even though the proeess for gi of August, 2008, the sarne has Taking into consideration, petition, It vrouid be appropri^te representations (Annexure P/5 anfl same, in accordance with law, with) With the aforesaid !or being considered for prornotion to the b dated 20)08/2008 i'Annexurs P/3) of the ^ttisgarh, petitioners' dstaiis.and Ani'iual considerauon, no decision with regaru to oDservaupns q^fepfri tinTCif •? fyet-rfSregR ^affinaiE^ r> ShrivHStavaLJ. Ipetitioners subrnits that 'oetitionars are ^achsr since 1894 and 1892 respectively jant OT prornotion 'was iriiiiaieQ in tn6 rnoriiri not iseen brought to Its iogicai conclusion. ne nature of conuoversy invoived in tnis to dii'ect rsspondents to cunsider Annexure r-vs) ana taKe aeciSion on ine n a i'easonaDie penoa. i, the peuiion is finaiiy disposed off. •'•a^ ^-s. SdA Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge 1 VFaffS ^V SS'TCR', .rFir.l'iinPT —FS/147—2/2(110 ^1,00,000.