,'i. !N_rHE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILA8PUR ICG) WRIT PETITION N0, '- PBT1TIONER ^v>'^' ^^^/ '^'l/'^''^'..--"^ .*'' .^<?'A sfyr ^-^^ ^y^-'"' ^^ ^?> RESI'ONDENTS 1. ••i-^T COP^ ^rs"at 2. 3. .0 Suryabali Verma., aged about 6B yeara, son of Late Tuplianl Prasud Vet'tna, retlred Head Mast.er, Amblka.pur (East), Kalgasa Primaiy School, Amblkaiiur, Dlstt. Surguja (Chhnttisgarh) Permanent Addresg; C/o. Ooviniyi Mishra, Near Moulvl Dam, Namnakala, Anibikapur IDistt. Surguja (Chhattisgarh) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, through - Secrctary, Ilepartment of School Educution, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhnwan, Ralpur (C.G.) Aciiuiintant General, Chhafctisgaih, Ruipur State <if Dtstt. Education OfHcer, Educntion Dlstricfc Anibikapui (C.G.) WRIT^PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, :NGH ja • wrswj-tievw • waus—•-•*. '<; * ^ ^.' XI-HC-78 sn^TqirR^i* gsTran^TOTfq; *ll*ini $h*lich 3:S?'"l|l<IIM<(,®TnwiS,RlCliyy ..W^^iSf.^ 200^ 3ll^li4a<»)('i^I^'i'T) ?Tarw?rf?a'3n^T 4-7. Mr. A.N. Bhakta, counsel •f|i Miss Deepali Pandey, Pandf 3, on advance copy. Mr. S.K. Beriwal. Centrdl advance copy. Heard. The case of the petitione[ Master, Department of Schooi ^i further case is that fron! his ©PfF final payment, has been wrongiy c^ deaucted once. When the petiti^ doted 26-5-2006 from respondejit has any objection regar'ding the ^ repr-esentation on 22-6-2006 (A\ the same on 24-6-2006, but the t Office of the Accountant Senerd Learned counsel for the p^ the Accountant Seneral be direc) of the petitioner regar-ding tha learned counsel appearing for the^ Having heard learned coun^el facts and circumstances of the c^ the petitioner is just, fair and <\ *i'><fc<41-) ^iwTffFs'4 <Ri«i< ^srf^T 311^1 ar the petitioner". Lawyer for the State/respondents No.l & 6pvt. Counsel for respndent No.2, on a is that he retired from the post of Head ducation, Chhattisgarh on 31-12-2002. His account, an amount of Rs.41,700/-, as part educted twice. whereas it should have been oner raised objection, he r-eceived a ietter .2 for sendin9 his representation if he :alcu!ation, on which the petitioner sent his mexure P-3) snd the &epartment olso sent iame is not beir^ considered and decided by ititioner submits that therefore, Office of ted to decide the repr'esentation/objection idouble deduction of 6PF amount to which respondents have no objection. for the partiesand having r^ard to tha ^se, the proyei* made by learned counsel for easonabie. Therefore,-respondent NSo.Z is ^xyxrxcrwx^x XI-HC-78 3TI^TW1?-IW HW 311^1 shKlti iV-.' Soma ^.^' ^ *11*1T1I 'SKWSh 3^ •<)l<lld<<, OTfl^'16, Rfdiyy .^...P..s^^/. ^-r""' 'fV^ 200-^ 3{l^l Mdch ('i?li^°»<<IST) repres^ntat directed to examine the records ond decide the same, in months from the date of receipt With the direction Par'ties are entitled for •ion of the petitioner after scrutiny of accor'dance with !aw, within a period of two lof a copy of this order. laid, the petition stands disposed of. Irtified copy of this order. c4ftif •tiiiit^.) tii^Tifte]A<Ri<^i< ^;3lf^1T3n^T Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge '\