^ HI©HCOURT OF CHHATriS^ARH ,AT BILASPUR Wrr^ Petitior. (5) No. 3105 of 2008 PKtstioner 5mt. Su^hama Panday, y^/0 Shri Aryind Pondey, Aged about 35, R/0 Nai-endra chaS, Lorrrii, DIstt. BiSaspur (C.6.} Versus Ke^pond&nt^ l- State uf chhottisgarh, through Secr^tory, Department of Panchay'ut Avam Rural &eveJopment bepartment, &.K.5- Bhavon, AAanTrolaya, Raipur (C.5.) 2, Zila Panchayat, Bitaspur, Throuh, Chief Ex&cutivs Officar, Biiaspur (C.6) 3- Niahu dubKy 4. Durga Prssad koiri 5< Vandur'iu ^upta 6 UmapQt&I Fal+'er names not known by petitjoner (Respondent no. 3 to 7 through Chsef Executive Officer Ziia panchyat, Biiaspur (c.g) WRFT PETTTON UNbER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CQNSTITUTION OF IN&IA. SjngSe Beneh : Hon'bte Mr. Satish K. ^gnfhotrl. J. 5hri Sandeep Dubey, Advocate for the petjtioner. Shri P. K. Bhaduri, PaneS Lawyer for- the re^pondant No- 1- ORAL ORDER. (Passsci on this 21st day of July, 2008) 1. With the consent of the appearing parts&s, th^ iriutter 5s heard finaiiy. 2. By thss petition the pe+itioner chuSS&nges the ^ekctiOn {ist (Annexure P/4)^ whereby the r^spondsnt^ No. 3 tu 6 w^r^ appoint&d by the Chs&f Ex&cutive Officar, Zilu pQnchGyat, BiSaspur. 3. Th& r&cruitiri&nt, uppuintrriKnt and other afervscB condition^ uf the Shik^ha ^ar-niia! are governsc! by tha Chhutti^garh PanchGyat Shjkaho KQ»~»T»i (R&crui'tm&nt und Conciition^ of Ssr-yicK^) ftultt^, @, 6. Th<skur 2007 ( for ^hort lthe Rutes, 2007' ). ISuSe 6 of th& Ruks, 2007 provsd&5 for rr»&thod of r£crustm£nt.SSui& 8 of the RuS&a, 2007 provids^: for probGtion, pur-^uant to th& ^I&ction anci appointment. Leur-nsd coun^Ei appiaaring for •Hia p&titjon^r ^ubmit^ that no oreier hua bKKH i^U&d, uS ashctiun Si^t is not an or-der, which i^ appi£{Iabl& undsr the proviaion^ of Su!e 13 uf the Rul&s, 200T Vv/itl-iout any arde.r riKithsr 5e!ection can tuk& piaca nor appoin+mant cun be tTiuds/Tlie procs.ss of 5&i£ctionaSwaya S&ada to pa^^ing of an or-d&r uf ^electiun und thereafter GpposntmBrit, if any Sinc& tha patitionar is queationing ths ^siection uf the r&^pond&nts No. 3 to 6 and appointrriKnt thKr&of, th'i5 orde.r \s app&ISabie undKr ths proyisions of Su!e 13 of the Ruk^, 2007. The petition&r has not macie out u ^trong cuse for a dttpartura from ths norma! ruS&^ uf taking r&courss. to tha ^tQtutory r&misdy bsfore approuching thi5 Court und&r Artick 226 of the Con^titutiun uf Tndio- Thls s^ not a ca^K, wher&in thia; Court shouid sx&rci^e ita Juri^diction undsr Articis 226 of the Con^ti-hjtion of Trsdia to Kutartuin 'rf-iis petition, wh&r& Glt&rnutive ^tatutorv app£uS ia avGi!abl&. Tn visw of th& for&going, th& pstition is cii5rr»i55£d,summoriiy. How^v&r, th& Sib&rty is granted to tha pstitioner to uvai! the statutory r&iTiedy uf app^ul, if SQ advlse.d. Sd/- SatishK.Agnihom Judge