^ SlngbSeneh S.B. (Service Matteri IN THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR rCHHATTISGARH^ WRIT PETITION{S) N0.^1 ^^/2011. PETITIONERS: s^ '.^%" •ff^- ^\^ le Kunwar Sai, son ofBadhan Ram, aged about 26 years, Pahadi Korwa, Ashrain Sargarhi, Block Balrampur, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. 2f Ku.Sukhwari, daughterofGururam, aged about 25 years^.Pahadi Korwa, Ashram Chilma, Block Balrainpur, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. versus Respondents l^^State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, D.K»S.Bhawan,Raipur, Chhattisgarh, 2o Commissioner, Tribal Welfare JDepartment, Raipur, Chhattisgarho L Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Departnient, Sarguj'a,, Chhattisgarh. 4. Collector, Sarguja, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh, S^Block Education Officer, Block iSJ-^^f"^ Shankargarh, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^-^.o XI-HC—78 7^ ^i^Krt^, ^Til<ri4s<o', [^<ni^^< ,..M.f...CS.^2U.2./..u.. ^ll^ldl skNlcb" » ' r"--"-/ • '^ 200 ^?T 'TT5RT (^crf35T^T) 3?TT^T ^T'f^TT^ TT^T 3TT^T sh^Jcf) '^^TW^ftU ^TT^nf [SB : Hon'ble Shri Manindra Btohan Shrivastava. J.| 22.6.2011 Shri C.J. K. Rao wifh ^ petitioners. Shri N. Nalia Roy, Pane| copy. Leamed counsel for the| relating to claim of contracl employees came up for consid| No.2004/11 and batch of the petitioners, tliis Courl] case in those cases. He subm| covered by the aforesaid orde4 On the other hand, that. the representation of th4 due verification. of peti^ions Aft.er going ttirough th^ W.P. (S) No.2004/11, it is| petitioners is squarely coverejd the petitioners are also entiUejd Accordingly, it is direct^d rppwspntntinn bftfore the COIJC or)i^f<n^li 'RP^f '^'l^^ <f^^l< ^37f?RW^T ihri Akshay Yadav coimsel for fhe Lawyer for the State, on advance petitioners submits fhat the issue :ual payinent t.o Cook and other ^ration before tliis Court in W.P. (S) and aft.er examining fhe claim had directed consideration of the fcs that fhe case of the petitioners is leatned counsel for the State submits petitioners woiild be decided alter order dated 15.4.2011 passed in apparent. that tJhe case of the by fhe albresaid order. Therefore, to the same direction in fhe case. that tf the petitioners make firesh erned aufhoritv, claimmg pavment ^ ••?<• ,y'",-'?"^. "'^ •^ .-,... ^,.y«&. % ^K^! ^ i ^^^!'"-m iTh XI-HC—78, 'S'ST "MNKn'4, ^fll^Ko, f®l^ll<?il|,< *II*ICTI 1b*ll<sh "^ 200 sn^r -^v ((^f^<^) ^n^T^T^N)' '^8n ^n^T'smtcF 1?^IW8rftn 3TT^T ~s Praveen of mmimLun wages applicabl Chhattisgarh CivU Service (C the sauie shall be disposed period of eight weeks fr^m the date of submission of representation. In the event would be at liberty to file writ|petition afresh. With the aforesaid dire<|;tion, the petition is fmally disposed of. cM^f^T'i ^i^<yff ^ f^S <fa^i< 'l^^t^R ^nt?T to a contract employee under ttie lontoract Appointment) Rules, 2004, bf m aceordance wifh law, within a >fany adverse order, ttie petitioners Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge I-