WWW 3mm fWm #aifaqm .‘Jus‘l’ice Dhirendra Mishra) lo. 501 /2009 ConsfifuTion of India) gSingle Bench; Hon'ble Mr W.P. sh (Pefi‘rion U/A 226 of Present: Mr. VR. Tiwari, Advoca‘re for The pe1 ifioners. Mrs. Smifa Ghai, Panel Lawyer for ‘rh 28. 1 .2009 Heard. e S‘ra‘re. /, WWW W mm ................................................... 111200 V mm (We) PETITIONERS 1. Ami’r Kumar KaTeliya, S/o Shri Sarvada Pmsad Ka‘rehyu, aged abouf 34 years, residenf of Villa‘ and Posf Mas’rur‘i, Tahsil Mas’rur‘i, Disfr‘ c1 Bilaspur (CG) V 2.7 Chan rashekhar‘ Tiwar‘il S/o Shri Ramakan’r Tiws ri, aged ubou’r 32 years, residenf of Villag and Posf Malhar‘, Tahsii Masturi, Dis’rr cf Bilaspur (CG) 3. Shya Kar’rik Sharma, S/o Shr'i Dinbandhu Sher a, aged abou’r 30 year‘s, residen’r of Villag and Posf Belsar-i, Tahsil Takha‘rpur', Disfr cf Bilaspur (C6) Versus RESPONDENTS 1. The Tafe of ChhaHisgar'h,‘ Through: Ther secre’r ry, Deparfmen’r of Panchaym‘ and Social Welfa e, Manfralay at D.K.S.vBhawan, Raipur (CG) 2. The D recTor, Panchaya‘r and Social Welfare Depart‘nen‘r, Raipur (CG) 3. The Co Iec’ror', Bilaspur (CG) 4. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayaf Mas‘rur , Disfric’r Bilaspur (CG) ,XI-HCn—78 mmw mmm mm g...r Imazoo mam (Wu) v mmm ~-I z Grievance of The peTiTioner‘s parficipcn‘ed in The examina‘rion cal Karmi Grade—III, however, fheir‘ names did no‘r find plae‘e in The lis‘r of had obTained requisiTe marks for earnT ThaT Their names were noT 1ey had noT marked D‘Ed. Column in Their represenTaTion Their case for clarificaTion was soughT from The aT The candidaTes, who are residenTs heir D.Ed. course ouTside The STaTe, i Grade-III or noT. The DirecTor, uery vide memo of Annexure P—12 'ficer, Zila PanchayaT Bilaspur sTaTed menT does noT prohibiT The residenTs r D.Ed. course ouTside The STaTe, in appoinTmenT. However, The cases of ve been deferred in anTicipaTion of mméé‘am -a,-amm n This pe‘rifion is That fhe pefifiohers Iduc’red for recruifmen’r of Shiksha selecfed candidafes Though They appoinTmenT. On enquiry, They menTioned in The selecTed iisT as T Their applicaTions. SubsequenTly, on appoinTmenT was. considered and Direc’ror, PanchayaT To The effecT Ti of STaTe of ChhaTTisgarh and done i may be appoin’red as Shiksha Karm PanchayaT in reply To The above t addressed To The Chief ExecuTive 0' ThaT if The adverTisemenT for recruii of ChhaTTisgarh who have done Thei ThaT case They can be considered for The peTiTioners for appoinTmenTs hc guidance. ‘ Learned counsel for The peT direcTion from The Dyecfo‘r, Eanchay been deprived from consideraTion fc ThaT he is noT pressing This peT peTiTioners may be permiTTed To ,iTioners submiTs ThaT despiTe clear aT in This regard The peTiTioners have r appoinTmenT. He furTher submiTs 'Tion aT This sTage, however, The file fresh represenTaTion before mm 111200 mw<¥i3w> wmm mmm mm§fsdm %ai&mm dem‘ No.4 be direc‘red To consider the enf within specified period. :ounsel for ‘rhe STaTe submits fhaf in presen‘raiion for rederssal of fheir fhe same shall be considered and eks from The dafe of receip‘r of The respondenf No.4 and in Turn, responl gase of The‘pe‘ri’rioners for appoim‘rr On ’rhe ofher‘ hand, learned ‘ 'case The pefifioners file fresh r'e grievance before responden’r No.4 decided within a period of fhr'ee w represenfafions. In view of The above submiss on of learned counsel for fhe parfies, ’rhe ins’ran’r pefi’rion is disposed of ’rh liber‘ry To The peTiTioners To make fresh represenfaTion along wiTh Thi peTiTion and cerTified copy of This order before respondenT No.4 for r dressal of Their grievances raised in This peTiTion and on such represenTa ion being made, The respondenT No.4 is direcTed To consider and decide T‘ e same in accordance wiTh law wiThin a period of Three weeks’ from The ddTe of receipf of The represenTaTion, ConsequenTly, I.A. No.1, appli disposed of. Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra‘f CerTified copy as per rules. caTion for inTerim relief also sTunds Judge