^ IN THE HIGH COUm1 OP JUDICATUREAT BI£ASPUR(CHHATTJ3<SA8H1 WK!T PJETJTIOW N0. 3'^°_ __/3QeS UNDER AKTICLE 227 OF THB CONSTmJTION OP mDIA ^ PETmONER: 1. Poleshwar Praaad ^ s/o Chitraaen Sharma^ aged 21 yeara^ Coatraet Teaoher Class IH^ Prihiiary Sehool Maapiar , r/o Ranj&tpiirt Tahall <and District Kawardha (C.G.) , ^ 2. Dl^neafe Sm^hi Bais, s/o Late ChetoEt Sisigli f JBais^ aged about 28 years, Gontraet Teaoher M- .^JL^ ^•'^:/y -'<^y Class III ,. Qavt. Primaxy School Raqjitpur, rf o Ranjitpur ,Tahsil aad District Kawardl^a (C.Q.) 3. Arjun@ Santo&h Pflifi, s/o Ha^aru Pall, e^ged 34 Year», Meinber, Sanxvida Shikahak Niyukti ^ ^ Samiti, r/o Ranjityiir, Tahsll and Diaitaact K«wardha{C.G.) ¥^rs1y^ RESPONDENTS : 1. CoBecttM" Kawardfaa, IMslMct Kawar®ia(ChKattis^r^ Sub Division^l Qfficer^ Kawardha, District Kawardha (Chhatfisg^rh) 3. Tejram, »/oAldl Salm, aged 31 yea^rs^ yiH^gB Maaipur , Post Singhangarli^ Tah^fla and IMatriet Kawardha (C.<3.) ,...._1...._._.„:__ *liH€^Tn»«<i^!» 7ST '^7T?iT^PT, 'graNm^, [®l<v1iy.li,< 3^......^.f...^.:..J^.^..^., ^2003 ^f^f TT^F ( ^^S^T) SII^TWf^WF WT ^^ ^iNW ^KII^T ^f^a 3?T^l 05-03-2003 Shri Rajeev Shrivastava w|th Shri V.C. Ottalwar, cozinsel for the petitioner. Shri D.R. Agarwal, Dy. Adv{3cate General for tlie State, The dispute ^arose regarq teachei^, As tiie record iadicateb were appoiiited as contract teac Meniber of fhe Selection Coniimlttee chaUedged RN petitioners No, 1 a& 2 was Section 91 of M.P. Panchayat Kawai'dha by rcspondcnt No.. pctitioncrs have raised prel^ lioiitation, jurisdiction aiid It is tlie case of tlie petiti<| issues were not framied by fhe petitioner had preferred a Kawardha who decUned to entd: revisi(t»n fhat it is not dirccted agaiast fherewitli thepetitioners have ap 4»{^fd^ft?lTnwif1?fe%I ^FSI^K iR-stt^Tsn^r tiag appomtoaient of contract th.at fhe petitioners No. 1 & 2 ^hers aiid petitioner No.3 is a )niBii|:tee. The a.ppotn.toients of the by way of an appeal under R^j Adhuiiyaai before fhe S.D,0, In thc said appeal the prcl^iiinary objections rcgaixliiig niaiallaiaabilify, petiti^ner that sitice tliese necessaiy }DO as prelujiinaiy issues^ the petition before the CoUector, rtam fhe ^axae on fhe ground particular order. Aggrieved proached tlds Court for reUef. ,a|ny Gt.PRJ—FS/7fi-5/200( -50,000. -^/ ^1$<1 ^T R;1W WT W^l sD^icft w^R'ff vsw^ 'SF^T -^MKn^ ^xfk-FT?, ^.LJ^:/..^... Wl 200 ^v TPW (a<|^t3^r) ^WS^R ^ftcl 3tl^T -1. Having heard leai-ned co eutertain. fhis writ petitiou at petitioners, as stated, have but the record mclicates that \ hearing before fhe SDO, Kawf petitioners who were opposite appearaiice, Accordingly argui was posted for orders, It authorities, as is clear froin th were given liberty to file writt( has becn lieard aiid final ord< finsel, the Court is riot iiiclm.ed to jthis stage. It is correct that the fi|ed certam preILmiaary objections \J7hen the niatter had come up for ^rdha on 16-12-2002 thepresent Iparty in. tlie appeal did not enter uibents were heard aiid the aiatter known whether thc niattcr is p| siace arguinents have been he^ird orders, it would be appropria|te aggrieved by any adverse 4 challenge tlie saine before the with law ia which event it will| grauted to raise all the of objections. As ia tenns of fli|E ^i<<?<r?^i^ 'RI^f ^ 'fe^t <Pn^s< ^^tf^H^T^T was further obser^ed bv the s order sheet, that the petitioners *n submission. Thus the matter ;rs ai'c to be deUvcred, It is not sudiiig or disposcd of, That apart, aiid the raatterwas postecl for for tlie petitioners, if tliey are >rder passed agaiast them, to appropriate PorumL ia accordaiice be open to theni and liberty is so bjectious iacludiiig prelmiuiaiy order dated 16-12-2002 it was GFJ}RJ—FS/7S- j?,(200( —50,000. 3- apn^T^RT^w WT^^T'^lN? j" ^ Roshan 'e" ^n^pir ^bw^ T^T ^^PTi^FT, '^t^FR'/ f®loll^^< ..^..^.^:...j.^..4. '^1200^ ^s^ xr^F( ^i^q^r) ^H^R ^lf^T 3??^l open to the petitioners to file a case the Biatter has not been stUl awaited, it is for fhe < would like to fUe written szib saymg tliat if tlie matter has be^ of filiag written subraission will With the aforesaid obs| ^yritten subniission, therefore, in cjoncluded as yet and orders are peti|doners to decide whether fh-ey ^issiou or not. It goes wifhout |n disposed of tlien tiie question ijiot arise, petition staiids disposed of, Con$ & I.A. No. 719/2003 for urgent Certified copy as per Rules ^equently M.W.P. No. 263/ 2003 I^eailo.g also stand disposed of. ^TOfe^l '^STOTf <f fe%t ifa^K '^^fRP:T3^T ^rvations aiid directions this Sd/- P.C. Naik Judge Gt.PRJ—FS/78- 5"/200( -50,000. «/^