^ i^. M.4Y 2D06 IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTLSGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition N0. ^063 /2006 SERVICE IUIATTER PETITIONER \^AW'./ ^wy / w/ ^^/v .^yy <y^y <^,,':'' RESPQNDENTS ./ •«^y r\0 E. ^' f. ..-"?• .i-> u8 n (SINGLE BENCH) JETHURAM DHRUV aged about 64 years S/o Late Kansu Ram Dhruv Ex. Assistant Teacher (Science) Government Higher Secondary School Village Jarve, Block Development Palari Tahsil Palari, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS :1. STATE OF CHHATTISGA^H Through Principal Secretary School Education Department f . Government of Chhattisgarh Mantralaya Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.) 2 DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER r' Raipur (C.G.) 3 PRINCIPAL ^-"" Govt. Higher Secondary Schoo] Village Jarve Tahsil Palari, District Raipur (C.G ) sSff^BS'®'?^^^^1?^^®2"''""^^^^*''!5^ 11111 Wtt% |g]@^ITION U/A 226/227 OF THE CONSyffiClTION OFINDIA PARTICULARS ^)F THE PETITIONER 1 t .?» r & 'SffE'!; !!!tl»iu-^W XI-HC-78 +II*ICTI sh*lich 3^ -^ww^, wS\w\e, [^fwjf, ^^.s^.^5.3.9.^^ 200 3ii^)?i lafi (l?i(31!"<t<) <KrR-ii'=b 1^1 shfi* fj ^' < ST<IIWBfeT3T1^T 29-6-; Shri V.G. Tamaskar, couns^ Shri Satish Gupta, Depifity Govt. Advocate for the State/ respondents No.1,2 and 3, on adv^nce copy. Heard both the counsel. The main grievance of the was working as Assistant Te^cher till he attained the age of superannuation on 31-7-2004 on ^ completion of 12 years service, t| Career Promotion Scheme and w^s granted higher pay scale vide order Annexure-P/1 dated 9-12-98 but regularly making representations No.2 be directed to decide repre^ the facts and circumstances of the directed to decide representation months in an objective manner an<i with law. With the direction afores.aidj Consequently, I.A.No.6150/ Parties are entitled for certifi tiiifa'fli iiinTtffecfl'<Ritci< ^i3f1^IT3II^T 1 forthe petitioner. petitioner in this writ petition is that he vhich date he demitted the office. On ie petitioner was given the benefit of till retirement he was not given the benefit of that pay scale. Learned counsel for the pe|titioner submitted that the petitioner is ut respondent No.2 is not considering and deciding his representations, tfierefore, he submitted that respondent entation towhich learned counsel for respondents has no objection. Having heard learned coun^el for the parties and having regard to case, prayer made by ieamedcounsei for the petitioner is just, fair and re^sonable, therefore, respondent No.2 is of the petitioner within a period of 2 pass appropriate order in accordance thepetitionstandsdisposed of. P006 also stands disposed of. ^d copyofthis order. ^•^" '"ixx^ gflpp^-i