HIGH COURT OF CKHArTSSGARH AT BILASPUR Vs. Uday Ram Dewangan, aged 42 years, S/o Babuial Dewangan, Siksha Kanni Varga - 3; Primary School, Village - Dargaon Blook, Tashii, Distt. Rajnandgaon. 1. Zila Panohayat, Rajnandgaon, Through - The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat; Rajnandgaon. 2. Principal, Govt. High School, Tiiai, District Rajnandgaon. 3. Champa Rawate, Shiksha Karmi Varga — 2, Hlgh Schdbi Surgi, Tah. and Distt. Rajnandgaon. Shri Somkant Verma, counsel for the petitioner. Ms. Sharmila Singhai, counsel for respondent No.1. Shri Sumesh Bajaj, Government Advooate for respondent No.2/State. Shri Vishnu Koshta, counsel for respondent No.3. (Passed on 19"'March, 2007) The petitloner claims that he is v/orking as Shiksha Karmi Varga-11 with respondent No.2 in Tilai. He is before'this Court for a direction to the resppndents to regularise his sen/ices as Shiksha Karmi Varga-11 with effect fror" 13-2-1995 and a!so to glve him increments from time to time. (2) Before approaching this Court, interalia, seeking a writ of mandamus, the petitioner had not made any request before the respondents. In rny opinion, the petitioner, requesting this Court to exercise iSs jurisdiction under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, ought to have made an appropriate request before the respondents and ifforany reaso.n, that request is not considered by the respondents within reasonable time or rejected, then oniy cause of action would arise for consideration of this Court. ^^^Kii^S^i^ z ssas^ (3) In that view of the matter, 1 am of the opinion that the writ petition is wholly pre-mature and the same requires to be and is accordingly rejected. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file an appropriate representation before the competent authority for appropriate reliefs. If and when such a representation is filed by the petitioner, the said competent authority shall decide the same in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- ChiefJustice ......^liltS Svy~