® ^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR EINQU WRIT PETITION NO^.T.7.^-2006 PETITIONER Si.ikrita Soni D/o. Shri Deo Narayan ^^ps- '^•••" VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. District Korba (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Education Department D.K.S. Bhavan Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad (^ Panchayat, Korba, Dist. Raigarh (C.G.) ^^ 3. Block Education Officer, Korba (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE COUNSTITUTIOIIQF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CEERTIORARI. MANDAMUS, PROHIBITION AND OTH^_ SUITABLE WRIT OR WMTS, DIRECTION OR DIRECTIONS, ORDER OR ORDERES: XI-HC-78 3tI^r?iTR-f traTS<i^isr>fi°h V (a- w. 3^'^IPn?CT, WTfly'IS, Iqciwy *11*1CTI SbHlth 200 Sii^i'i <<a<n (>i?t!3<!«<lr) s^aiWfll^a'sn^T 14.6.2006:- Shri R.S. Patel, counsel fc^ Shri Satish Gupta, De respondents. Heard both the counsel. The case of the petitioner| Grade-111, Primary School, Kurud| No.2 vide order dated 30th Aug| Primary Schooi, Keubahar to Pri Korba as per Annexure-P/2. Sh< Primary School Keubahar on 2^ joined at new place i.e. Kurudih <j 9-12-2005 transfer has been ca| rhyme or reason. Learned counsel for the p] already joined and the petitioner| the impugned cancellation order | decide the representation consic| to which ieamed counsel for resi »i<<F<i41-i•(iitiT?fto^<Ri«;i< ^sri^tir'ain^r the petitioner. ;>uty Govt. Advocate for the State/ is that she is working as Shiksha Karmi, h, Block and District Korba. Respondent jst 2005 transferred the petitioner from nary School, Kurudih, Block afl8 District was relieved by the Head Master ofthe -10-2CX)5 and in pursuance of that, she n 7-11-2005. However, vide orderdated icelled by respondent No.2 without any ^titioner submitted that the petitioner has 1 wants to make a representation against |o respondent No.2 and h®be directed to |ering all the grievances of the petitioner ^ndents has no objection. Request made by learnec^ counsel for the pet'rtioner appears to be just and fair. Having heard iearned coi^nsel for the parties and having regard to ths facts and circumstances of t^e case, the petitioner is allowed to make a representation to the respond^nt No.2 within a period of 15 days from today raising all her grievances ^ decide representation of the pe| nd in turn, respondent No.2 is directed to titioner within another 30 days from the XI-HC-78 3fI^T?iTf^IRi (WTSll^l Stlllqi ,•' Barve HTt|<tT S(WT<»» 3^ '<|1<11<1<1, WTfl^'IS, Rldltiy — .A^':.fi.'fr.9nlA<. • <^ •*»*»**tl**» «-«"<•* • • »^ 200 3ll^»liiach (l<:l^'!l<{lir) WBRRBfeTBTI^T date of receipt of representation | representation, in accordance witlji With the direction aforesaid Consequently, M.(W.)P. N4 Parties are entitled for certWed <tii<itci41-< *iiiCTTffte^t'<Ri+<ii< %3lRtIT3n^?T considering all the points raised in the law. , the petition stands disposed of. .2109/2006 also stands disposed of. copy of this order. Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge