.K ^^^ ^^->'^" k," C ^P /®0 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH WritAppeal S^ /2009 (DB) ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WRIT PETITION (S) N0.179/2009 ON 15 JANUARY2009. PETITIONER APPELLANT Jeevan Ram Yadav, S/o Late Shri Rainuram, Aged about 4^- years, Resident of Village - Bhanupratappur, District — KankerNorth Baster, (C.G.) •VERSUS. RESPONDENTS 1. (citL^j <^ ft^-i^e^- {fff^ f^^^TV^ 2- State of Chhattisgarh, Through- Secretary of law Department, D.K.S. BhawanMantralaya, Raipur. (C.G.) Registrar General, ^y High Court of Chhattisgarh, ^^'v*^ s^fvi) Bilaspur (C.G.) <^< l' IVJW^, REoeipT ei.Ei» 3 CHHATTISSAnM IUMIS088T •ILASFUB Writ Appeal Under Section 211) of Chhattisaarh Hiah Court (Appeal to DLvisioiLBenchlAct, 2006 District and Session Judge, Bastar, Jagadalpur (C.G.) . HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Division Bench: Hon'bte Shri Justice l.M. Qudtdusi Hon'bte Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra. Writ Aooeal No. 54/2Q09 Appellant State of Chhattisgarh & othera. Shri R.K. Kesharwani, cour^d for the appellant. Shri Sumesh Bajaj, Govt. Advocate wfth Shri Ajit Singh, Panei Lawyer for the respondent No.1. l&ipeai to Division Benchl Act, ORAL ORDER Ths writ appea! has been fiied against ths impugned order datect 15-01-2009 passed by the tearned Singte Judge. The writ appellant was engaged as Contingency emptoyes from the contingency fund by the Distrtet Judge, Bastar at Jagdaipur jn the year 1996. His services were no longer required as such he v/as disengaged. Thereafter he has fited a writ petition No. 3224/2008, whteh was disposed of or. 22-07-3X% wfth a dsrection that (2) After constderi^ the representation, teamed Dfetrtet Ju paid one month's ^ages to the appellant. ' ;n .•L 38^ 'h:. '''?. •A- ^'6 (3) Feeling aggrteved, he fded another writ pet'rtton No. 179/W3S whichwasdismissedon 15-0't-2£X©. (3) The appeilant has aforesaid judgment and nstant wrtt a^eal against teamed Singie Judge. (4) The wril appellart was a contingency employee and wss being patel wages from contingency fund by the DistricS Judge he has no rght to continue when hss servtees is no Songer required he was disengaged. However on consictering the representation, teamed District Ju<^e has paid him one month's wages. (5) The wrtt appellant cannot have any daijn as the matter of right and therefore, we do not fiml any dl^ality in the order passed by the leamed sir^te Judge. The writ appeal is therefore dismissed. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge <.