Q Kgwr IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR 'w.P. (S) No. ‘2 Lmé Igg gram PETITIONERS /1. Ramesh Kumar Sahu, S/o Shri BC. Sahu, Aged about 45 years, R/o GovtJ. Yoganandan Chhattisgarh P.G. College . . \ay W Distt. R;’aipur—(C.G.) J 2. Akhilesh Tiwari, S/O Late Shri Hari Govind 9 T3 Tiwari , Aged about 47 years, R/o 41- Ravi Nagar , Raipur—(C.G.) g 3. Yashwant Kumar Bahirat, S/ O Shri Anant Rao Bahirat, Aged About 52 Years, R/O Street No. 15, Block No. C—93, Smriti Nagar Bhilai, Distt. Durg.(C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS / 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Secretary, Department of Higher Education, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Commissioner, Directorate of Higher Education, Raipur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS, PROHIBITION, CERTIORARI ETC. OR ANY OTHER DIRECTION OR ORDER TO DO JUSTICE IN THE MATTER The Hon’ble Chief Justice and his Companion Justices of the Hon’ble { ‘ %300 mm (ma) mama?“ $3€fdwsné¥r SB: Hon’ble shri Manindra Mo] 1an shrivastava, J. 12.07.20 10 Shri Sunil Otwam', counsei for the petitioners. Shn' Vinod Tekam, Panel advance copy. ) Heard. Learned counsel for the p been agitating their claim for gr: pay—scale nom due date, which, Learned counsel for the representation of petitioner N Annexure P—S, which was made petitioners’ claim for grant of s scale has not been considered, I been taken. Taking into consideration petitioners before this Court, as petitioner No.1 is pending cons: same has been taken, it would be expedient in the interest ofjustice to dispose 0d this petition with folk Lawyer for the State] respondents, on 4r :u'tioner submits that petitioners have mt of senior grade and selection grade so far have not been granted to them. petitioners submits that one such 3.1 has been placed on record as as back as on 6.4.2009, but, till date, enior grade and selection grade pay~ [or any nnaldecision on the same has the nature of grievance raised by the also that representation made by the deration and no final decision on the )wing directions- 6 mm (Wu) mmm wmm Wmm __2_ WW€€§€IW $WW (a) (b) The petitioners may respondent No.2 Wi today. submit detailed representation to thin a_ period of 2 months from If such representatic period, respondent accordance with law within a reasonable period, with an outer limit of 4 ns are nled within the stipulated 0.2 shall decidet the same in onths n‘om the date of receipt of such representau‘ons 4r With the aforesaid directio s the petition stands unally disposed off. § SdL § l Manindra Mohan Shrivastava" Judge WW “72.00