HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR PETITIONER RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION N0.3848 OF 2005 Kumari Anjulata Rathore, D/o Baldau Prasad Rathore, aged 21 years, R/o village Sharakhon, Tah. Janj'gir, District Janjgir - Champa (CG). Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Department of Panchayat and Rural Development, D.K.5. Bhavan, Rajpur 2. Director, Panchayat Avam Samaj Sewa, Mahanadi Khand, Mantralaya Parisar, Raipur (CG). 3. The Collector. Janjgir-Champa (CG). 4. Chief Executive OfRcer, Janpad Panchayat, Nawagarh, District Janjgir - Champa (CG). Writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri S.K. Tiwarit counsel for the petitioner. Shri Shashank Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the State. Shri Sandeep Dubey, counsel for the respondent No.4. ORAL ORDER (Passed on this 15th day of April, 2009) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the question of law involved herein asto whether the services of Shiksha Karmi Grade - III after appointment can be cancelled on the ground that there was irregularity in the selection process. 2) This very question came up for consideration before this Court in Ku. Punam & Others vs. State of C.G. & Others1. Wwhile allowing the case of Ku. Punam (supra), this Court observed as under : "22. The cases on hand are not the cases of cancellation of the selection process, the seleotion processes have not been found vitiated on account of any reason including mass copying or mass irregularitjes. The present cases are where the appointment orders, after having giveh efFect to, have been cancelled subsequently, on discovery of some facte that ' 2008 (2) CGLJ 366 fl^ some of the candidates had submitted false and forged documents to obtain the appointments. 23. Applying the well settled principles of law to the facte of the presont casos, the respondents/authorities have already prepared a second s©locttist on th©basis of th©selections held earlier. On scrutiny, most of the candidates found place in the second list and their appointments are continuing, as such. Some of the candidates could not find a place in the socond list aftor scrutiny on aocount of doubtful documents submitted by them. It is, therefore, directed that the candidates who have not found place in the second select list be afforded an opportunity of hearing to establish genuineness, truthfulness of the documents submitted by them for obtaining appojntment on the posts before their appointments made eariier are cancelled." 3) In view of the well settled principles of law, this petition stands disposed of in terms of Ku. Punam (supra). Consequently, M.(W.).P.No. 9/2006 stands disposed of. --—- Gowri Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge