^^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0.-^ ^c\^ /2011 PETITIONER ^ ^'^"".^ v^ j^y. ^^ y^ ^^' ^ Jagdish Singh Kanwar, aged about 31 years, Son of Late Shri Anand Ram Kanwar, Occupation - Nil, Presently residing at Subhash Block, SECL, Colony, Korba, District - Korba (C.G.) Residence of Village & Post- Karainara, Tahsil - Kartala, District - Korba (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS The State of Chhattisgarh, through - the Secretary, Department of Higher and Technical Education, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Secretary, Department of Man Power and planning, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 3. The Director, Employment and Training Directorate, Woman Polytechnic Campus, Bairan Bazar, Raipur (C.G.) 4. Joint Director (Training), Govt. Industrial Training Institute, Koni, Bilaspur (C.G.) 5.. The Principal, Govt. Industrial Training Institute, Korba District - Korba (C.G.), WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRITS OF MANDAMUS/ CERTIORARY AND SUITABLE ORDERS/ DIRECTIONS ETC: The petitioner respectfully begs to submit as under:- i^— WWtl ^^iJCh ^~o? ^i^Kri^ ^ti1<H'll<o, [®lcrtj<H^< ^^.^...e....a.)...7.^.a.g. •^20<PI ^^ T^W (liciij[<s<<^T) ^TR^T ^T 'R-iJch 'cT^TT STF^T^HR^F ^^TW ^fi'H 3^?T SB: Hon. Mr. Justice Pntinker Divl 08.12.2011: Shri Roop Naik counsel for the | Shri Y.S. Thakur Dy. AG for th^ Grievance of the petitioner i^ professor on contract basis from 17.| further contract appointment has not| further grievance is that advertisem^ respondent No.5 inviting fresh applic|ations persons of his choice. Counsel for the petitioner su| Government have been ignored by the petitioner may be permitted to witjidraw respondents 3 and 4 apprising them ^ He however submits that a directior) consider the case of the petitioner. State counsel submits that leg| contract appointment. However, he h^ respondents 3 and 4 for redressal of h| Accordingly, the petition is \ aforesaid. Needless to say that if th^ <=M^^I ^i*i<riT ^* °fe^ <[^^i< ^ 31RFT 3:n^?T aker petitioner. respondents. that though he has worked as visiting 12.2007 to 30.5.2010, his candidature for been considered by the respondents; His nt dated 21.10.2011 has been issued, by from the candidates to appoint the bmits that various circulars of the State re|spondent No.5 and therefore, at this stage this petition with liberty to approach ^bout the correct factual and legal position. may be issued to these respondents to illy the petitioner has no right to get fresh ^s no objection if the petitioner approaches |s gnevances. ^lismissed as withdrawn with liberty as 3 petitioner files a detailed representation XI-HG—78 *<i*i'di (f»^ra» '^^ ^ww^, ^ti1^4i<o, [®i<ni<H^< ,..M£.L^....^^.q.q,....^2 3:n^?T 1c7^p (llGif^<s<^) 3?T^T ^T Rrli<=b TW 31T^T 5b^icb '^RHW^ft^ ^rTT^T before respondents 3 and 4, they accordance with law considering all th^ This Court has not expressed authorities concerned would be free td accordance with law. ct)M?<n<fli 1RTTOf'^* 'ft^t' <f^i^i< ^3?RTH^?^T shall consider and decide the same in 3 aspects of the case. any opinion on merits of the case and the decide the case ofthe petitioner strictly in Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge I-