c^i^ (D IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR fC.G.) ^,^^ W.P.f S) N0. ^bi'U /2Q11 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS VERSUS 1. 'wA^ -^y ^y":y Smt. Appalamma aged about 36 years, D/o- late J. Raghava, w/o- late Jagmaiya, R/o- KLC, Zone-II, Khursipar, Bhilai, District- Durg (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department of Education, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) €^. ^••" 2. ^'^y ^ <$6'- 3. Rao 4. 1. 2. 3. District Education Officer, Durg, District- Durg (C.G.) The President, M.V.N. Memorial High School Khursipar, Zone-III, Bhilai, District- Durg (C.G.) The Secretary, M.V.N. Rao Memorial High School Khursipar, Zone-III, Bhilai, District- Durg (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. PARTICULAR OF THE PETmONERS: As mentioned in the cause title. PARTICULAR OF RESPONDENTS: As mentioned in the cause title. PARTICULARS OF THE CAUSE/ORDER AGAINST WHICH T±jE PETITION IS MADE: The petitioner prefers this instant petition against an order 1 <"> iNliBIINNNUk HIQH COURT OF CHHATnSGARK AT BIIASJPUR 8B : HON'BLB MR. JUSTICB PRITUtKBR IMWAKBR PETITIONBR RBSPONDBNTs W.P.ISI.MO. 3680/2011 Smfc AppaJanuna versus State of Ctdiattisgarli Others Shri F.S.Khare, cotuisel for tfae petttioner. Smt Smita Ghai, P.L. for fhe State. WMT PBTITIOM UMDBR ARTICLB; 826 OF THB CtM»8TITimOH OPINDIA ORDBR (11.07.3011) Counsel for the petitioner sabnuts that the fafher of the petitioner died on 27.5.98 when he was in scmce but the case ofthe petitioner for compassionate appoiatinent was aot dccidcd tBl 2(X)7 and she was not only cheated by scveral persons but JBistly her husband deserted her and fhen ia the year 2006 he also expired. He submits that fhe financial condidon oftfae petitioner is pattietic aiid if sonie concession is not shown by the govenuaent ia asppoua&a^ hcr on coinpassionate ground fhe petitioner would be ia difficully. He furfher submits fhat the pctitioner xnay be permitted to withdraw thls petition with Ubexty to fite representatioa to icsp. N0.2 aad in tum the resp, No.2 be directed to dccide the repiiescntation of the petltioner. On the othcr hand, cozinsel &r the State poiats out that the petitioner has no legal r^t whatsoever to claun for coinpassiOBate appoiatment aad fherefore fhe petition is not maintainabte. Be that as it may, the petitioner is permitted to withdraw thla petition with liberty to ffle representalion before the resp. No.2 and in tum fhe resp. N0.2 woiiM be at Hberty to decide thc repreaentelion in accord&nce with law. ir'i '^ t tt is made clear that this Court has not e3qaessed any opinion on inerits of thc case and fhe resp. No.2 is at Uberty to decide the rBpresentation so inade in accordao.ee with law. ___- Sd/- pritinkerDiwakar Judge