Sftl^ r RPnSPK ^S5bt^ ^...e ^ <-^.^? ^-; S.B. (Service Matter) IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARm WRTT PETITIQNfSLNQ^c^ /2011. PETITIONER .•-"' ri^"?. .•y^y' Respondents Bhuneshwar Singh Paikra, son of Amar Sai Paikra, aged about 33 years, Watchman, Pahadi Korwa, Ashram Batko, Block Batouli, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. versus ^ / 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretaiy, Tribal Welfare Department, D.K.S.Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Conunissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3. Assistant Comraissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Sarguja,, Chhattisgarh. 4. Collector, Sarguja, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. 5. Block Education Officer, Block Batouli, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTLCLE 226 OF_THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^ XI-HC—78 *lt*lCTI th*<ich '3~^ •<fiqiCiq, BITll^'ie, [s|<'||y^< ,£^.l...^»:...^^ 200 sn^i '(ra?? (li°ii'la1'^) an^l w R-< ^TT 3(n^T sti^W TOTW ^fel 3IT^7I <t)|'4[<T<ftl ^WV\i ^f f§1^<P>t-^l< ^aiRTiTsn^i >-.. i^^' Shri C.J.K.Rao, counst Shri Praveen Das, Dy. for the petitioner. 3.A. for fhe State. Counsel for fhe petitio^ier to clami of contractual payii^ent caine up for consideiation 2004/11 and W.P. (S) N<4 petitions and ader exaaiuunj Court Iiad directed subtnits fh.at fhe case of .er subinits fhat fhe issue rela.tin^ to Coob and other einplovees |before fhis Coiirt in W.P.(S) No. 5772/10 and bunch of other fe fhe claim of llie petitioners, fhis of the case in those cascs. He |iie petitionet is covered by the direction be issued fbr decidins fhe represeiitatioD. of fhe pet^tioner also. consider^tion Cozinsel for tlie State the petitioner would be (^ accordance wifh law. ^ubniits that the representation of lecided after due verification in. W.P.(S) No. 2004/11 and (S) No. 5772/10, it appears| coveied by fhe aforesaid ord^ entitled to fhe same directiorj Accorduigly, it is dir^ jresb representation before payinent of nunimum. wa^es| s order dated 15.4. dated 29.6.2011 that the case of rs. Therefoic, fhe ia the case. passed in W.P. petitioner is ioner is also petiti.on.er inakes ±ieconcemed authorily, clanniug appUcable to a contract eiaployee 1 XI-HC—78 sn^i 'ERI (^•<icti W? an^l aiiro •ysi •^rra^pT, e?€taTre, ^wiyy H11CTI a>*11<»» 3T^I'^^('iclfda"i?) wnwdfCTa^i A LU-l.l-iLt.-'Jl qnqiOTl^-wRfl'ii ft^'riw?n ^sifOTSTI^T $ar& civQI Service (Contract Appotatment) Rules, 2004, the same shaB b|s disposed of ia accordaace witti law, withia a period ofeigbtw^eks from the date of subniission of representation. In fhe ev^nt of any adverse order, the petitioner would be at liberty t^ file petition alresh. Wifh the aforesaid directfon, fhe petition stands disposed It is naade clear fhat thjs Court has not expressed aay opinion on the nierits of the c4se aad the authority conceraed wouM be at Hberty to decidd fhe representation strictly ia , - - •• y accordaace wifh law. Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker ^ Judge '