.Jf ^ c^^^l^- IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.1 WRIT PETITION (S) N0. -^K^ OF 2006 PETITIONER : /' \^y/ .siSC^ ^y ^^t" <^7' 'y Vinod Kumar Sahu, aged about/^ 54 years, Son of Late Shri Dukhiram Sahu, Resident of Village and Post Tanoud, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. .^£ff—-:ass^^ .x'^'^a ^s'?'?2*'si<. ;-*"'"" "":'*., "^ f^'K^' f . \ ...A, ^ I'l .,.iw~"'-'.~.;: Jj \\ -'..•.'"< /'•'A;'r ,^i? State of Chhattisgarh, /- Through: The Secretary, Department of School Education, D. K. S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.). The Director, Public Instructions, Raipur (C.G.). The Collector, District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.). The District Education Officer, Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). ^' ^\ ^^^.^. f </' ^ ^^ ^ ^- -> 5. The Block Education Officer,^. Pamgarh, District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.). 6. The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Pamgarh, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. 1950 FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI. MANDAMUS ETC. AND FOR APPROPRIATE ORDER/ORDERS. DIRECTION/DIRECTIONS. Sj sa .^-'~^_. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 5147 of2006 PETITIONER : Vinod Kumar Sahu. VERSUS RESPONDENTS : State ofChhattisgarh & Others. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION QFJNDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Asmhotri, J. Present: Shri P.P.Sahu, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Shri V.V.S.Moorthy, Deputy Advocate General with Shri P.K.Bhaduri, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents 1 to 5. ORUER(ORAL) (Passed on 30ttlday of March, 2010) 1. Learend counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the grievance of the petitioner with regard to non-payment of salary from December, 2005 to April, 2006 does not survive at this stage in view ofthe averments made bythe State/respondents in their Teturn dated 10.03.2010, which reads as under: "3....The salary ofthe petitioner from December, 2005 to April 2006 has been sanctioned bv the District Education Officer, District Janjgir Champa for disbursement of the salary of the petitioner...." 2. Shri Sahu further submits that however, a direction may be issued to the State/respondents to disburse the salary to the petitioner at the eariiest as the amount became due in December, 2005 to April, 2006. 3. Shri Moorthy, learned Deputy Advocate Oeneral appearing for the State/respondents 1 to 5 submits that the needful shall be done at the earliest. 4. Accordingly, the State/respondents is directed to disburse the salary ofthe petitioner, as aforestated, within a period offour weeks from the date ofreceipt ofa copy ofthis order. 5. In view ofthe above, according to iearned counsel appearing for the petitioner, nothing survives fbr adjudication at this stage. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- Satish KAgnihotri Judge C*'. t.--"^