d( ^ ^v ~. \ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR, CHHATTISGARH WRIT PETITIONNo. <33^ OF 2004 / PETITIQNER Yogesh Kumar Lunia, aged about 27 //ears, S/o Milapchand Lunia, ' resident of Amapara, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari (Chhattisgarh) RESPONDENTS Versus /~y ^ p/ 'fi'€y >''^'>~:-'" 1. State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary Department of Revenue, D. K .S. Bhawan, Mantralaya,Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2. The Collector, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari (Chhattisgarh) 3. Sub Divisional Officer(Revenue), Dhamtari, District Dhamtari (Chhattisgarh) 4. Tehsildar, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari (Chhattisgarh) 5. Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission through its Secretary, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) °~ WRnLPETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227_OF_THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA j>- XI-HC-22 311^1'ERT . R-ti.* 3)I^[ so-Mi^ 'yfin ^ "^: -^ -ss( •^\VHv^^a'^wis,V^<»iv'y. flWII Sb*<l<») ani?Tira% _.,,.'^f,.l.lol^].^ ^ 200 ft^ST' sii^i •reiiwiifsg' 23.07.2004. Shri B. D. GTITU couas^l for the petitioner. Shri U.N.S. Deo, G- Learued couiisel fbr pctitioncr had appeaicd 4»i^l<?1^1'l •Hffl^l* "^ fs^ ^^R, ^3rf:tPT3IlSCT wcnyncat Advocatc for fhe State/ respondent Nos. 1 to 4. • SIuiY.C. Sharma, coujiselforfhe respondent No.5. Heard. fhe petitioner subinitted that the ia the Civil Scrviccs PEelmuxiarv Examiuation, 2003 conduc^ed by ttie C.G. State PubUG Semce Commission aad he qualifi^d ttie same. However, as per the requireiuent offh.e.rules the|person, who clauus to be OBC, SC & ST candidate is required to Jfumish pennaaent caste certi&cate to appcaT iathc fm.al cxamiiia^ion. In thc case of thc pctitioiicr hc Iias moved aa application fc|r graat of permaaent easte c'ertmcate bcfore fhe Tchsildar, Dhamt^ri who graated luai temporary caste certi&cate (Alinexure P-2) Officer, Dhamtari affer cond^icting aii eiiquuy refused to graat the pcrmancnt caste ccrtificate i^i favour of thc pctitiDnerstatuig that he does not belong to OBC Dhanitari aud saTJne is p examination is scheduled to ^ pctitioncr is not aUowcd to wtiole petition will becomei ^nd fhereafter, the Sub Divisioxial categoiy; Against the said order the petitioner has made a r^presentation before tlie CoUector, snditig for decision and fhe final sommence fi'oia 26.07.2004 aud ifthe appear in fhc cxamiaation. than his iitfructuous, even if thc CoUector decided to graut the penita4ent caste certificate ia favour of the- petitioner. w XI-HC-22 ail^r^T R-lt'* <9I^I ai^tch yRa :<- "A': .—^a 'fSI '^Mt^, w^wiz, hv\wy, 3TI^$T 4^<*> *iri »TWllW ••^ 200 ^t^ss' 5m^F'?RiWHfe( leajbied utn teiapor^iy On fhe bfhfir ^and argued fhat as per the pcrmaneat caste ccrtificate is eutitled to appear ia the flnal e?i| Haviag heard the leam.e|d regard to the facts aad cii-cuim -regard to fact that the was alrcady issucA in favour of| directed to aUow the petitioner however, his result should bt penuauent caste certificate. la the nieaittiine, fhe dccidc thc represcntatton of thc| the Sub Divisio&al Officer for iu acGoidance wifh law wifhin receipt ofttus order. Wiffa the aforesaid o£ Consequently, M.W.P. NQ, atso staad disposed of, Certi&ed copy today. reqtureinent *i'')I<rt<i1-i flffRlf '91^<zt\Ritii< i?3lPOT 311^1 couiisel &r_fhje respondents of fhe rules' unless a fumished thc pctitioncr ,'is not ilamuiation, eounsel for the parties, having :ujnstaaces of fhe case aad. haviug caste certificate (Atuiexure P-2) fhc pctitioner, tfac rcspondcnts arc (;o appear ia fhe mam: examanation, not declaiied untUhe files the (toUector, Dhamtari is directed to pctitioncr filcd against thc ordcr of jraut of permanent caste certificate period pf 30 days from the date of direct^ons, fhe petition stands disposed 1.1801/2Q04& I.A. No.4712/2004 r- Sd/- LC.Bhadoo Judge [4®^firt y^: ^Y