C g (a? LC smGLEamé IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHATTIS GARH} 2 % ‘ WRIT PETITIOMS) No. 81$? 3Q (2009. l xléETITIONER: /smt.Radha Bai, wife of Ganesh Sahu, aged l (Revisionist) about 25 years, residencé of Mudpali I Kishora, Tahsil N Tagarh, District Janjgir— Champa, Chhattlsgarh { 1 x ; r x versus i ‘ e’spondents / 1. State of ChhatEtisgarh, Through thayat and Social Secretary, PanK i Welfare Department, D(.K.S Bhawan, I Raipur, Chhattjsgarh. /2. Director, Panchayat and Social Welfare, Raipuir, Chhattisgarh. /3. Additional Collector, District Janjgir— Champa, Chhattisgarh. /4. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Navagarh, District Janjgir- i Champa, Chhattisgarh. 5. Project Officer, Woman and Child Development Department, Janpad Panchayat Navagarh, District Janjgir— § Champa, Chhattisgarh. / 6. Smt.Gauri Devi, Wife of Jeevanlal Mahu, residence of village Mudpar Kishora, Tahsil Navagarh, District Janjgir—Champa, Chhattisgarh. ' WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226(227 OF THE ‘ CONSTITUTION OF INDIA E i 1. PARTICULARsro‘F THE PETrrtnwmpm-\ I R ,, 1§T1T10NE Riev‘i‘sionist)? 1 Advocate for the resporldent No 6 M ‘ B on y ‘thi‘s’ spetiti0n,thfe wpetm 1 i (Del1vered on 13 da of January, 201 1) 'ék‘siP“ a r writ I iinitti'e Tnétur '“ pR ' ’ ' ( ‘ é ojf ,~ ppomtment of the petmoner on the post of Anganbadl Karyaka 3’_ I: a ra f é _ made a complamt before the respondent No 3 An enqulry was 1 r, conducted by the Sub D1V1s10nal OffiLer (Revenue) Janjgn‘ and a $ treport was submltted before the respondent No 3 on 13 10 2006 jAccordlng to the sald report appomtment of 13 Anganbadl ' Karyakata was found to be m acco dance w1th the rules The - respondent No 3 v1de order dated 22 12 2008 (Annexure P/4) pheld that the Chlef Executrve Officer Janpad Panchayat , Nawagarhfhas Vlolated the prov1s1ons of law, thus quashed the i; i: appomtmen, order dated 30 05 2006 As a sequel the petltloner r l preferred an appeal before the'krespo dent No 2 whlch was also V d1sm1ssed confmnmg the order passed by the respondent No 3 Shn ao leamed counsel appearlng for the petrtloner would subm1t th the appomtment of the pet1t1oner was 1n accordance , ' w1th law, and only on a basr fof false complarnt her appomtment has been cancelled The petltlone falls w1th1n the category of p , below poverty l1ne (for short ‘BPL )wh1ch ls ev1dent from the -‘ ~ documents (Annexure P/5) and she 1s also a res1dent of the saJd' , Gram Panchayat as her name 1s present 1n the voter llst of the _ Gram Panchayat Further, she has preferentral rlght to appomtment - over the respondent No 6 as she ls class 12 passed whereas-the I; r respondent No 6 rs only class 8 fpassed and accordmg to the 1" as}: ,7 2‘ c1rcula1‘ dated 0901 2006 (Annexure-gP/7) the petrtloner w rlghtly grven the appomtrnent 0n the other-ghan U a a, V 'l VI ' V __ ppearrng for the espondent N ’M l ' ‘ 13 E ‘ El: the orders passed by Werespondent-authorrtres are reasoned orde 2h La. r 9K Bhadurl, leamed Panel V 7“: I a .1 " _ Vi " ‘ R ; f 0 rs . d b y tOs, an 1t has een passed after affordmg d e opportumt of hearmg e petltloner e Dlrector Panchaat has cons1dered e e pt a th d p d a a ee th d exaned beore} ' vn e rec‘Ords‘ and ocuments w re also‘ mi f ‘pigth impged osi ‘assnse un rder * hr , learned"i'couelearin Si Ali nSappg 'wk il b d o that onld ouldlmae simar sumission and ini'adition t he w sb h p ? um1t tat the petltloner ought to have flled a etltlon under At 227 ea A rlcle 1nstd of rtlcle 226/227 of the orders passed by he nent’No 2sah t the pe‘tllonerjhas‘not praed fr tlrej seleetlot‘proe‘e hus}. the pryer, th Th y ach and I, very oms rlsed by e petltloner‘an the r'esOndent No'. 6, an or e resonen N. 6 0 e onstltutlon o nl ‘ e.,042jo1o, d~‘01. similar . submissions as made by respondent. No1, l'to 3 and 5;:have been mde. a ‘ a V pain ffth pr, pthe leains and ocuments appended theret i Th h ete e autontles below have compl _. name of the et1t0ner was mth f L L at serial: V, 1 ike/fhs o erg ore aties erusedi ac a t f th pdt O , ‘1 th C f Ida t respod d Hu it y o s e etitionera aed’l'for, qua a th phs pry shl n n‘s T ; a for pdg d o the fi’ th I he» mvvoEHBaE owgmmugmw _,”WmQmwr§ Eggwwe m9, _, uwomnagoa SE ammmawmoa“ gw._aa_a<§w aww w mmm mm gnaw” 2_m w§£\§ Hg mayEdwaagoamyocEg mza: o 9w §mo€ ow w mommag gm HungQg 8 Ea vaamosm cacsmEm 8 EH owamoaw Hamaagoa mroamca mEa: 8, m6 m3§§nQ 0&8 mowam:_&€:ca nwsmEwa 1 2 $ nsgaowowacm:momao $8 Ergwa88 gm vmwmam EEEa 9. m§ oEmm 9: EgoEmm €35 , ca 83:38? 58H. _ E ,EaaommQg rm: g gd €Eo na §$ : uahflcatlon “for aomtment fact h has not bee f wh1c n llector or the D1re a ct he Impugned order ate or the reasons mentloned eremaove 2 052009 (Annexure P/l) passed by t1e Dlrector Panc ay an v2 d i he order dated 22 12 2008 (Annexure P/4) passed by 't th i; 'A a,~ dd1t1'onal Collector; Janjglr-Champ he post of Anganba 1 a nd r , _ - nd exammmg all the documen s mclud g the 11st of BPL a t dlr > J q pp on i F hb t d renquashed; The,,\mattera1 a s 7 » j; r t ‘