_I_1;_the High Court of Chhattisgarh At BilaspggCEJ w.P.N§7§305 F§u PETITIONER Vx Harsh Kumar Satpathi S/o Vijay K: ‘ Wy . Shankaxgitpattt? Years A - oc pper Age§Ap9g§ mswn 53 Q>O,‘v’3£fa Teacher, Govt. HS. Schooi, \,.a"m;>- a 9é cav .. *ev @‘ " 94/?x, ‘ Mahapaui resently Dismct Discontinued) Raigarh (C.G.) " R/o Village Navapaxa Post— Bade WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA fi / Q3~ 6%Q5‘o Qkégp’ Haldi, Via - Pussour Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) VERSUS 1) State OfChhattisgarh x Through SecretaryDepartment OfEducation, D.K.S.Bhawan, k Q Rapiur 2) The Director, Lek Shikshan C? .0 K9 § ‘/ Sanchalnalaya, Behind Board Of q / 77;? Secondary Education, Pension to Q §’ Bada, Raipur (C.G.) if ' 0' 3) District Education Ofacer, A; a. v K Education, District Raigarh ( c m 4) Divisional Superintendent Of k Education, Bilaspur Division Bilaspur (C.G.) 5) State OfMadhya Pradesh, / Through Secretary Department o§ Eéucation, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal (Mia) m’sfiy it was not the case of fresh appomtment and secondly even if it was e cause title by the petitioners, the same ccuidhot facts, when the same have been as final Without verification of the was not recorded in the order The officers have misread and misunderstood the same. Thus, the impugned order dated 26.7.2005 (Annexure P—1 4) is quashed. 4. it is expected that the State shaii consider - the cases of both the ‘é rdated 2.3.1998 passed by'the Madhya 8MQ which according to the petitioners have attained finaiity by the direction issued by this Court for non-compiiance of the order dated 2.3.1 998 to conSider the representation and decide tn accordance With iaw. within a period of six weeks, from the date of receipt of copy of 3. Be that as it.may, the impugned arder is vitiated on two counts, mentioned in th petitioners in light of the orde In OA NO 8 Pradesh Administrative Trtbuna Jabaiour this order. er asto 5. in view of the above the writ petitions are atiowed. No ord costs. Sd/— Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ashok