SINGLEBENCH IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR(C.G| •S-- ^^ ^^7 y',/oy' ^" .^' Vf^ ^ .-s; ^ o^' ^ 6* Writ Petition N0 3>^-S | /2005 Smt Reena Be Deniel, aged about 39 W/o Visnoi C. Deniel, Upper Divisional Teacher, Govt. Middle School, Avashpara Block- Charama, Dist- Baster (C.G) 2. Smt. Rajkvimari Mesh Ram, aged about 52 year, w/6 Gand lal Mesh Ram , Upper Divisional Teacher, Govt. Primary School Avashparakrra, Block- Charama, Dist. Baster (C.G) 3. Gand Lal Mesh Ram, aged about STYears S/oBablu Mesh Ram, Govt. Primary School Babu Mohan, Block-Charama Dist. Baster (C.G) VERSUS RESPONDENTS ii \M&JK^^-}!^ s A ^v"'i"° ' /fr ? 1. The State of Chhattisgarh, Though the Secretary Department of School Education, Mantralay, D.K.S. Building, Raipur (C.G) 2. The Commissioner, Adim Jhati (S.T.S.C) Department Raipur (C.G) 3 The Assistant Commissioner, Adim Jhati (S.T.S.C) Department Kanker Dist-Baster (C.G) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226/227 OF THE CONTITUTION OF INDIA n- s^) XI-HC-22 3n^T?iT f^iwsn^r 9>li»tiyRtl 9>11»ti e'i.fa» 3^ •<ii<iict<i, WTflwis, Rcuyy 3ii^i ^acn liini s»»*ll<»»••••••••••••••••••••• g^ 200 sii^i ^wiwsfeT tbwfi-f'ifl-f t<l*<<-fTfffcl<il 'KIW/I. ^sri^irsn^fT 10.08.2005 Shri RakeshAntony, couJDsel for tte petitioners. Shri Pankaj Shrivastav^, Pa.nel Lawyer for the State on advaace copy. Heard. , Learned counsel for ^he petitioners subniits fhat fhe petitioners are working as Ifpper Division Teacher in vanous schools in District-Bastar. Vjle also subnuts that they havc successfulty coiapleted their ^.T.I. ttainiag during fhe tenure of fheir services aad on accouilit of certaui circular of the State Govenunent they are entifled to advaace increinents ia pay. He further subinits that fhe petiti|»nersand some ofher persons total 21 in Nos. had earlier filed anjorigmal appUcation before fhe State Administrative Tribunal for t^ie suiular reUefs nam.efy O.A. No. 991/2001 (Ashok Kumar & 2C others Vs. Stete ofC.G. & ofhers). He also submits fhat the rec^rd of origiiial appUcation has been received by this Court after ab|oUshing of fhe S.A.T. but it has not been registered, therefore, th^se 3 persons/petitioners amongst petitioners ia the said onffi^al appUcation bas filed this writ petition. Leamed counsel for fh|e peti.tk>ners undertakes that the namesofthe these 3 persons/^etitioucrs shaU be deleted fixim the said or^mal appUcation, aftei} the same shall be registered and listed for headng before this C^urt aad fhe facts reganling passing of order in this writ petUion sb^tl be brought to the notice ofjudge -^a-d— "'•-.. '3^) XI-HC-22 sn^rw i^iwsn^r *x (fRa MK^ 3^ •<ii<iiy<i, t^Tnwid, facfiyy ^J^^.^o.i.S&.s'L *11*<CTI n,.,|tt, ••••••••••••••••••••• g^ 2gQ Rre^- 3tA<i ewiWHfer ^': *wT<-)41^ t<it)<-)T¥fei<rl<R|«I< ^3l1^'IT3D^r heamig fhfi said or^uial appli|a.tion No. <091/2001. For the tiine being, learaed counsel for fhe pjetitioners subnaits that fhis petition may be disposed of-with a Eberjy to the pctitioners to file a detafled representation before the conc^med authority of fhe respondents and the concemed aufhority |aaay be directed to dispose of the representation within fhe stipu)ated period granted by fhis Coiut. This liinited piayer ma<jle by the leamed counscl for the petitioner is not opposed by fh4 learned counsel for the State. Tfae prayer is aUowed. The petitipners are allo^ed to file a detaUed representation before the concemied authorit^ of the respondcnts wifhia a period of 3 weeks. finin today along |with copy of Uus oider and copy of writ petition and if such a rejpresentation is filed, fhe concemed aufhority shaB be obliged ts^ dispose of the same as earty as possible preferably wifhin a p4riod of 3 inonfhs fiuia fhe receipt of fhe said representation. Wifh the aforesaid obs^rvations, fhe petitiou staads finaUy disposedof. | j——-— „ Certified copy asper ru]|es. ! c._. .1 ! SunU Kumar Sinha Judge