X: }^^^ 's<^'" ,/-' ^•21?^--"""' ^•c,^^^-"" IN 'STHE HIGH CQURT OF JUDIGATUSE AT BILASPUE w, CHHATTISOARH .P. N0. /<SSQ /2006 raut.s ir'.a Lokeshwar Siriha, Aged about 24 years,. S/o. Deoprasad Sinlia, R/6. Village Navdabri, T'ahsil Naharpur, District Kanker (pG) ^SPOTSV&WtS 1] 31 VERSUS Stafe of Chhattisgarh, Tbrough: Secretary,. Tribal wettare Deptt., D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG) CoUector, Dantewada, District Dakshin Bastar.Dantewada tCG),:..:,-.. ^,:" ,E)lI^foI^^^Panchaj^ and.Gramni Vikas ^Vlliliag, CltUaftisgarti, Raipur, Distncf RaipurlCG) » 4] Chief Uxecutive Officer, Janpad Panchayaf, Bhairamgarh, District Dantewada (CG) 5] BIpck Education Ofticer, Janpad Panchayat, Bhairamgarh, uistrict Dantewada |CG) &] Ctiiet Kxecutlve Ufflcer, Zffla Panchayat, Dantewada, District Uantewaaa (Cu) WEBITPETTTION UBDBRARTICLB236/227 OT THB GOHSTITUTIONQFINDIA "*»»—. HICH«30lntTOFJinaCATaRBCHHATInSGARH:«IIA8I'OR Sln^Benchs.Hoa'blfiSteiSatisUK.^^Iiotri,^^ W.P^IIo. 1038 OF 2006 Pistitfoner , ; Loteshwar SinUa Versus' :':'''1 ' ::':;/ ;' ' ' ' ;': '' '-; ' ' 1'.' Respondents : Statecrf'CIihattisgarh& Others. ShriManoj Paraitj^, ecmHsel^tte ShriSuiulQtwanl.panellanyeTforthe^^^ ORALORDBR ':^(24"'';M[arcI»,:2006)..; . : \ . .',:• : ;, 1. Tfais petition chaUenges the uiipugned order dated 30.11.2005, (Annexure P-9), passcd by fhe respaodent Np.5, wheretoy fUe^^ O^ of Primary School Pedapal, Block Bttairamgarh, Distnct Dantewads, has been. directed tfaat tfae prder dated 20.10,2005, (Aimacure P-5), passed by thc Jaapad. Panchayat, Bhau-amgarh, appouiting Shiksha Karmi, Qrade-HI, be^ i^ giwen efifeet to wifhout permissiou ofDisti^eoIlector.Dantewada^ 2. Learaed ccniasel ^ the petitioner siibmits^^^^^ffl pctitioneT was duly selected and appointed as^^ Kanm Gl^e-ni, vidc onler dated 2Q/1Q.2(X)5 (AnBexure^- 5), passed by fhe jBsp<3Ddeiit N0.6. TherGafter, 'Qie pctitioner submitted the; jo3nulg;Tepbi4^onS.12^ Learaed co^sel lias further sub^ hadjoniedtUedutiesolr 5.123005, itselK^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 3. T^ petrtioaeE was inforn^ that tfae entire selection pnx:ess appomlii^ ShiksUa^^^^^^^^K^ canceUed. It is furfher contended that fhe petitionertoas a^ — ^js^^^^l ?^^^j e~ y-^ -T- TeGcived aay written inlbrmation as yet about caacenation ofth&Selecticm piOGeedings, cwhis appoiatme^ 4. Learned (XMmsetappearmg for fhe^^re 3,, submits that 'the petilioner has DevcF joined plu-suant to lus selectibn and appointinent as Sh^ Grade-III, as tfae Aiuiexure P-8 is fUe app^ petitioner to fhe Chief Executive Officer, Janpad panchayat, Bhau-amgatli, for hiK jpuiing. Itwas fiu-ther submitted fhat since the entire selection proceeduigs have beea quaslied aad new selecttou process has t^n mitiated, (he petitioner does ncrthayeany rightto^hcappointmfiht. 5. Be that as it may, leanaed colmsel for fhe petitioner subauts that fhe petitioner has made a representatiori, (Aiuiexure P- 11) to fhe Secretaiy SchedUled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and Backward Classes, Welfare Department, Govenuneiit of Glihattisgarh, therefore, fhe respondents may be directed to decidethesaidrepresentationwithiiiasti.pulatedperipd. 6. Haying Iieard learDed counsel for the partifis, in the facts aad Gireum.stances ofthe ease, fhe respQnderits are directcd to consider and decide^the repreaeiitatmn ^ in accOTdatice wifh law^ within a peiiod ofthree weeks, fix^ the date of receipt/production pfc»pyofthis order. 7. In view of foregouig, this petKion staDds disposed of No prder as to costs. Sd/- SatishK. Agnihotn Judge •SS&