.^ L^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION N0. ^3>S-S /2005 PETITIONER < ..^':-1 RESPONDENTS C1 CJ y^ A^:- ^M^ ^e:^ .-y &v' 'AO" ..y ^y. ^•- Tejram Dewangan son of Late Shri M.R.Dewangan, aged about 43 years, Training Officer I.T.I. Mana Camp, Raipur C.G. Rajya Karmchari Sangh Prakoshtha Pramukh, Tahsil and District Raipur [C.G.] Resident of Rishabh Nagar, New Rajendra Nagar Raipur, Tahsil and District Raipur [C.G.]. VERSUS ^ 1] The State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Higher Education, Technical Education and Manpower Planning, Science and Technology Department, Mantralaya, Raipur, Tahsil and District Raipur [C.G.]. 2] The Joint Director, Employment and Training C.G. Women Polytechnic Premises Byron Bazaar, Raipur, Tahsil and District Raipur [C.G.]. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRITFS1 ORDERFSI AND DIRECTIONrSI TO DO JUSTICE IN THE MATTER. © HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pritinker Diwaker Writ Petition No. 2355/2005 PETITIONER Tejram Dewangan Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh and another Shri Malay Bhaduri counsel for the petitioner Shri N. Naha Roy PL for respondents/State WRTI PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA ORDER (18.08.2011) The petitioner who is working as Training Officer in ITI,Mana, Camp Raipur is aggrieved by schedule IV to Annexure P-1 which provides for relaxation with respect to acquisition of technical qualffication after attaining the age of 50 years for promotion to the higher post of Principal (Class II). In paragraph No.2 of the return filed by the respondents it has been stated that the State Government have already taken the initiative for amending the Chhattisgarh Industrial Training (Gazette) Service .Recruitment Rules, 2005 and there is a proposal for deleting the condition specified in the said schedule. In view of the return filed by the respondents and the statement made by the counsel for the respondents, for the time being, the petitioner feels satisfied and there remains nothing to be adjudicated. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. Needless to state that the State Government will act in accordance with law. However, in the event of any subsequent development, the petitioner would be at liberty to approach this Court again. Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge