HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Wnt Petition No. 2043 of2005 ^ PETITIONER : Dr. Smt. Shyama SuAa W/o Sliri Mukul Prasad SiiAa, aged about 43 years, Assistant Professor (Political Science) Gov-t. NES P.G. College Jashpur Nagar R/b Near Kirtan Bhawan, Jashpur Nagar, Distt. Jashpur (CG). VERSUS RESPONDENTS : 1. State of Chhattisgarh thi-ougli the Principal Secretar^.', Department ofHigher Education, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (CG). 2. The Cotmiiissioner/Director Higher Education Govt. of Chliattisgarh Go\±Science College Campus Hostel No. 4 Raipur (CG). 3. Tlie Principal, Go\±NE8 P.G. College, Jashpur Nagar, . Distt. Jashpur (CG). (WTUT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 2267227 OF THE CONSTrTUTION OF INDIA) (SB: Hontble Mr. Satish K. Asmhotri, J.) Pr^eiit i Shri N.K. Malviya, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Y.S. Thakur, Deputy Advocate Geneml with Slm M.P.S. Bhatia, Deputy Govt. Advocate for the State. ORAL.QRDER (Passcd 02? 19th day ofMarch, 2909) With the consent ofthe parties, the matter is taken up fbr heariiig finally. 1. Leamed counsel appearing fbr the petitioner submits that the case ofthe petitioner is identical to the case of Dr. 8mt. Sarojbala Sliyag Bislmoi Vs. State of Clihattisgarii & Othei-s (W.P. No. 4099/2003). Leamed counsel farther submits that the present petition may also be disposed ofm the same ienns as passed in the matter ofDr. Smt. Sarojbala Shyag Bislmoi (Supra). ^- jiiiiuNnr^. 2. 8hi*i Thakur, leaiiied Deputy Advocate General, appearmg for the State, submits that he has no objection if the same order is passed in the present petition also. 3, Accordingly, the petition is disposed of in the same tenns i.e. having considered and without expressing any opinion 011 merits ofthe case, in the opimon ofthis court, ends ofjustice will be sen^ed ifa direction is given to the petitioner to make a detailed representation raising his/her gi'ievances before the competesit authorit^respondent No. 2 along with a copy ofthe petition and this order, within a month^ and on such representation beiiig filed, the competent authority/respondent No. 2 shall decide the same on its o\wi merits, in accordance with law, as early as possible preferably within tlii'ee months from the date of receipt of the representation, It is made clear that if any giievance still subsists, the petitioner may avail the remedy available under the law. No order asto costs. 4. Consequently, pending applications, ifany, stand disposed of. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge