7 o c) c C -b { BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION r S ^ No. Vcf / 2010 PETITIONERS: ^ // ^ /l. /2. Chunni Lal S/o Milandas, Aged about 62 years, R/o Soridnangar/Dhamtari, Post, Tehsil & District Dhamtari, C.G. Premsingh S/o Dhanaji Gond , Aged about 56 years R/o Village & Post Balodgahan, Thana & Tehsil Gurur, District Durg, C.G. VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Pubtic Works Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, C.G.. < 2. Engineer in Chief, Public Works Department Civil Ljne, Akashwani Chowk, Raipur, C.G. >/ 3. Chief Engineer Public Works Department Civil Line, Akashwani Chowk, Raipur, C.G. /4. Superintending Engineer, Public Works Department Raipur Circle No.2, Civil Line, Akashwani Chowk, Raipur, C.G. / Executive Engineer, Public Works Department Dhamtari, District Dhamtari, C.G. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION INDIA -ft°^' HIGH CQURl' OF CHHA'mSGARH AT BIL^PUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 719 of2010 PETITIONER : Chumii Lal & another. RE8PONDENT8 VERSUS : State ofChhattisgarh & Others. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUl'lON OF INDIA SB: Hon9ble Shri Satish K. AgmhotrLJ, Prescnt: Shri Satyendra Sahu, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri M.P.S.Bhatia, Deputy Goveniinent Advocate forthe State/respondents. ORAL.OBDER (Passed on 19U1 day of February, 2010) 1. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioners were initially appointed by order dated 19.08.2008 (Aimexure P/2) as unskilled labour on the pay scale ofRs. 2550-55-2660-60-3200/- by the Executive Engineer, Public Works Depai-tment, Dhamtari. Thereafter, it was discovered by the autliorities that the petitioners were wrongly employed as unskilled labours, in fact, they are skilled labours. Accordingly, a commumcation was sent to the superior ofllcers vide letters dated 29.08.2008 and 10.06.2009. Despite that, no order has been passed for coiTection of tiieir status as skilled labours. The petitioners have also made a representation on 07.08.2009 (Aimexure P/4). 2. Be that as it may, ifthis is an error, the same can be coiTected only by the otficers who have passed the orders. This Court, by way ofa writ or directioii, camiot direct the employer to comply with the recoimnendation made by the junior officers. In view of that, no writ ca$i be issued. Howeven if on scmtiny, it is found by the autliorities that therc was an error, the same may be considered and decided as e^qpeditiously as possible. 3. With the aforesaid obsen^ation, the writ petition is disposed of Allllt \ Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotn Judge