d ,0 L^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR7 Writ Petition No.32s^of 2004 PETITIONER: Mahesh Ram Baghel, son of Shri Lekhan Baghel, aged about 42 years, by Caste Halba, resident of Village Chhote-Tumnar, ,^^" ^y^' '"^""" RBSPONDENTS: -%^^ •"^' ^^ Development Geedam, Dantewada. Block District Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Ministry of Tribal Welfare/ Education, D.K.S. Building, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.). 2. The Collector, Dantewada. 3. The Block Development Education Officer, Geedham, District Dantewada (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226 8s 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR THE ISSUANCE OF WRITS IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS, CERTORARI AND /OR ORDER(S) AND /OR DIRECTION(S) IN THE NATURE OF WRITS pffr /^ mOH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR SmGLEBENCH : HON'BLE SHRE 8ATISH K. AGNIHOTRI, J. WTiIT PETITIONNQ. 320S of 2004 Petitioner Resnondents Versus Mahesh Ram Baghel State of Chliatdsgarh aiid ofhers Present : Shri Aiit Singh, counsel tbr the petitioner. Smfc Auju Ahuja, Deputy Govenuaeat Advocate for the respondents/ State. ORAL ORDER (20"' April, 2QQ6i 1. The petitioner was appointed by fhe order dated 8.10.1982 along wifh others as Assistant Teacher. One of the tenns aad conditions of fhe appoiatment was fhat fhe caudidate would subinit caste certificate aad educational qualification certificates ia origuial to fhe Principal of the concemed H^h SchooL 2. The petitioner failed to produce the origiaal caste certificate as per reqiusite conditions of the appointment. Accoiduigly, the petitioner's appointnient canie to aa end. 3. The petitioner was thereafter giveu show cause notice to submit caste certificate. The petitioner failed to submit origmal caste certi&catefor about 20 years. 4. In view offhe non-coinpUaace ofthe requisite conditions ofthe appoiatment order and after haviug given inore fhan required opportuiuties to the petittioner, the unpugaed termiaation order was passed ou 31.7.2002 (Amiexure P-1). The petitioner does not acquire aay right when he bas filed to submit required orteinal caste certfficate on fhe basis of which fhe oetitioner was aopointed and the oetitioner was however given inore fban 20 years tuae to produce original caste certificate. 5. The petitioner has utterly failed to estabUsh that he belongs to Halba Schedule Tri.be Coininittee. 6. In the facts aad circunistances of the case, the petition is miscoiiceived aud deserves to be disniissed. Accordinglv, the petition staads dismissed. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge