gh §m; i Chairman, Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board, Dangania, Raipux £C.G.) Secretary, Chhattisgarh Stata Electricity Board, Dangania, Raipur (C‘G=) Additional Secretary, Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board, Dangania, Raipur (C.G‘) WRIT PETIfION UNDER ARTIf‘TnE 22€é0g 22 CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1K3! ISSUANCE (H? WRIT I)! HAEQBE <£? CERTIORARI‘ mmsz PROHIBITION AND E'OR OTm SUITkBTiE' WRIT OR WRI£S m& OR Qwm 9%CTIQ! QR DIRECTIONS mm DEIITION no. 133 [2005 03 PETITIONER /§ishant Kamde, S/o. Shri P.C. Kamde, Aged about 23 years, R/Q: 5—C, Teachers Colony, Dallirajhara, District Durg(C.G.). XI-HC-22 3?; 28-4-2005 On a mem‘ion being made fhe maffer- is faken up for hearing‘ Sm? Fouzm Mlrzu couns£ i for +he pe'l'moner Mr Yashwan‘r Txwarl Advoca‘re appears on benulf of Mr Abhlshek Smha Advocate for respondem No 2 Heard bo‘i’h fhe counsel. The case of The péfi‘rioner is Thaf he belongs To SC cafegor'y and offer passing Bachelor of Engineering in Mechanical Wing from Govt Engineering College Jagdalpur in The year 2003, 'rhe Sfafe Eleciricii'y Board issued an adver‘l’isemen‘l in employmenl news invi‘l'ing applica‘rions, for 1'he pos‘l's of Assisfan‘l' Engineer and Junior Engineer. In response‘ro same 'i'he pe‘ri‘rioner applied for fhe pos‘l' of Junior Engineer annexing all ’ fhe fesfimonials. Thereafter resul‘r of The wriffen examina'rion was published by fhe Chhai'fisgarh Sfai'e Elec‘l'rici‘ry Board. The peTifioner as qualified in fhe said wrii’fen examinafion and was called upon To appear i'fhe inferview which was ucfed on 6—9-2003 and The pei'ifioner remained successful in Thaf in erview and his name was included in The selecTion lisT and ThaT came o be appeared in The newspaper ’Danik Bhaskar'. ved The leTTer for submission of The documenTs on 20"“ February 2004 and The peTiTioner submiTTed The documenTs. BuT, however, r on The fafher of The peTiTioner was informed ThaT due To Typograp icai misTake The peTiTioner has been puT in The peTiTioner re w n c d i e XI—HC«22 fhe cafegor'y of 5T insfead of ‘ SecreTary oilEsThe C.5.E‘BT, he wa: be corrected soon and The pe‘m ‘BuT so far ThaT leTTer has noT bee In fhe circums‘rances, Ieam ThaT The peTiTioner may be allow raspondem No.2 and respondem‘ which counsel for respondem No.‘ Having heard learned coun To The fads and circumsfances make a detailed represen‘mfion 1 days from “loday and responder)? The peTiTioner wiThin a’period of fhe represen‘lm‘ion in an objectivl mlsed by fhe pe‘h‘honer m accorc Consequenfly, IA No.449; Parfies are enfil’lecl for ce SC. When his fdi’her com'ac‘l'ed “the i assured Thai fypographical misfake will ioner will be issued appoin‘imem leii'er. n issued. 1ed counsel for The peTiTioner submiTTed zdTo make a deTailed represenTaTion To No.2 be direcTed To decide The same To 2 has no objecTion. sel for The peTiTioner and having regard 3f The case, The peTiTioner is allowed To o respondenT No.2 wiThin a period of 10 No2 shall decide The represenTaTion of V one monTh from The daTe of receipT of as manner afTer considering all The poinTs ance WiTh law WITh The direcTion aforesaid The peTmon sTands disposed of ’2005 also sTands dlsposed of. rTified copy of This order Sdl- L‘c. Bhadoo Judge (@W)