BILASPUR HON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON’BLE SHR! SUNIL KUMAR $INHA, J. WRIT APPEAL N0. 255 of 2008 APPELLANT] (Petiticner in Writ Ku. Monika Shukla D/c Shri Shyam Sundar‘ Shhkla, Aged Petition) about 22 years, /o B.D. Mahant Upagar, Janjgw District Jaxugir- Champa (C.G.) $E 1 OF THE O DNiSiO Sh S Kosh, iearne couei for the appeiiant Sh Sumesh B, iearned Gov Advocate for the ri ajaj t State/responents 1 and ‘ he“ Ngggggilgos) The foiiowing judgment of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J.: Learned counsel for the parties are heard on admission. 2. Appeilant Ku.‘ Monika Shukla has filed this writ appeai against the order dated 11.11.2008, passed in W.P.(S) No.6276/2008. \3 ‘i \. 1U aw s HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT DNESION BENCH Coram R n , VER$US WRIT APPEAL UNDER SECTION 2: CLAU CHHATTESGARH HEGH COUR" {APPEAL T BEI\CH) ACT 2006 Piesent : n P y e ns d No 2 RESPONDENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Department of ,Panchayai 8. Rurai‘ Deveiopment, Mantraiaya, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Coilector‘ District Janjgir Champa, Janjgir, CG. i 3. The Chief Executive Officer, ' Janpaci Panchayat Nawagarh, District Janjgir Champa, C.G.- 2 3. Appenant Ku. Monika Shukla filed the writ petition for the foiiowing re‘iiefs : “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondents to produce entire record with regard Petitioner’s ciaim. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindiy be pleased to direct the Respondent No.3 to start consideration of ne of the petitioner to appoint on post of Shiksha Karmi Varg—3 reserved for unserved handicaped person at Janpad Panchayat Nawagarh; District Jan‘igir Champa before invalidation of waiting list. 10.3 Any other relief, which Hon'ble court deems to be tit and proper of this case in favour of the etitioners, may kindly be allowed. 10.4 Cost of the petition may als be given." o 4. Te appellantipetitioner, thus, in substance was seeking a h direction to respondent No.3 for considering the petitioner’s case for appointment on the post of Shiksha' Karmi Grade-Iii for unsen/ed handicapped quota. 5. The petitioner’s entire ciaim in the writ petition was based on her inclusion in the waitingxlist for the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-ill. A perusal of petitioner’s representation AnnexureP/4 reveals that there were four other persons in the waiting list above the petitioner in the said category. That apart, a person included in the seiected list/waiting list has no right to seek mandamus for her appointment on a particular post. .w i to am p P ):?4 , 3 E 6. In this view of the matter, we do not find any scope for interference in the matter. ?‘. The writ appeal, therefore, is iiabte to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summariiy ‘ ‘ sd/_ / Sd/- Chief Jusu'ce Kumar Smha i sunii Judge V Judge /