I r— ‘ C/C; ( 5 $mw a’W' BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATm IQQJ w.P.(S) No. \ X §5 OF mulk PETTIONER / 1. Ramkhilawan Chandrakar S/ o Shri Bhanu pratap chandrakar age 60 years Upper Division Teacher Tarra Distric Durg (CG) VERSUS 9 ~ RESPONDENTS /1. State of Chhattisgarh Through “ The WRIT PETITON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT OR «NMANDAMUSlblRECTION WNWV OF OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT. é Department, D.K.S. Bhawan \q/awL/(‘r\\ /. Raipur‘ (C.G.) 2. Director Public \ng0'}""\(<’\\'7/0 Instruction Bhawan ..«-*‘k@o Raipur (C.G,) ee' V. e” Principal, Public Higher Secondaxy School Tarra Distric HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETlTlON (S) NO. 118 OF 2011 PETIT!ONER Ramkhiiawan Chandrakar Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition under Artic!e 226 of the Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present :- RESPONDENT Shri Somkant Verma, Advocate for the petitionet. Shri N.N. Roy, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on this 25‘“ day of March, 201 1) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. u According to the learned counsel Tappearing for the petitioner, the petitioner, who is working as Upper Division Teacher, is aggrieved by the impugned order, whereunder a sum of Rs.46,91 6I‘ has been directed to be deducted from the salary of the petitioner. holding it to be excess payment made to the petitioner. The dispute involved in the case on hand cannot be adjudicated, at this stage in view of the fact that no order has been pointed out by the petitioner whereunder the impugned recovery proceedings have been initiated against him. Be that as it may, the petitioner may make a representation before the respondent authorities by raising his grievances and by relying on various decisions of the Supreme Court as well as this Court within a period of two weeks and after receipt of the said representation. the respondent authorities are directed to consider & decide the same, in accordance with law & on its own merits. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. ”MM/,2, Sd/é Satish K. Agnihori Judge Gowri t