j^^s€:::::-. —^s^is---" na"&5f1 BB»y T1u (LC \^°^-. r/ /'/. f<: E. Jagdishwar Rao S/o ((^ srkn.TT ^ ^'}^p/l 111 p'rJ f i-i.. r 'C.G. 2. The Commissioner, MataRukamani Sev/a Sansthan Samiti. ll. i-jas TX^SI'TI HIGH COURT QF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 5868 of2009 PF'TTTTms.fT.'T -i ^r JL A-1 i\^^^ RESPONDENT! E.Jagdishwar Rao. VERSUS rtate ofChhattisgarh &'0tliers. WRTTPETmgN UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE CONSTrTUTION O] INDIA SB-.Hon'bleSIiri Freseiit: Sh.ri S.P.Kale. Advocate tbr me petitioner. Ms. Siinita Jairi. Panel La-iVv'er for the State/resoondents 1 ife 2 /p^^c,^,^ ./^^ flQth ^.,^. ^-f ^^+^1,^^ '7Af i i'Q.SSS'Cl OH UV uuV 01 ^JCTODCF. 2U!J>' Heard leamed couiisel for tlie parties. 1. Leanied counsel appeariag for the petitioner submits that the mstant pe-trtian is squarely covered by the decision ofthis Court rendered iti Srnt. A.Lali v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others', thus the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation to decide his case in the liel'it of afbrestated decision, subject to verification asto whether the respondent No. 3-Institute is a Oovennnent Aided school and the petitioaer is a teacher within the sanctioned strength. 2. Leamed counsel appearing for the State submits that in the eveiit, the petitioner makes a representatioi-s. the SEUIIC "till be considered and decided, ^e. ^-P in accordance with law, withm a psriod of four weeks from the date ol receipt ofthe representation. 3. In view of foresoma, accordina to the leamed counsel appearmg tbr the petitioner, nothms survives in this petition fbr adjudieation. 4. Accordingly, the wrrt pgtition is disposed of Sd'- ^nVft «s\v^^Ssf ^^^y • 2007 (V' BLJ 265