v'" IN THE HONOURABLE CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION No. 9^^ / 2001. ^ ^y. y..^.-'' ^:>"'' PETITIONER: Yersus RESPONDENTs: ^''^^ 01. 01 C.K. Maliilme, Asst. Teacher, Tribal Welfare Primary School (Adi.m Jati Kalyaxi Pmtihamik Shala), Maraga, Block Manora, Dislrict: Jashpur Nagai\. Clihattisgarh. The Slate of ChhaKisgark Tlirough it5s Chief Secretary, D.K.S. Bliawa.n, 'Raipur, Chha.ttisgarh. Distdct Collector, District: Jashpumagar, Chhatti.sgarh. .^' ^' ^- Writ Petition uiider artide 227/ 226 of the constitution of India. -l^ XI-HC-22 w^r'^1 i^wwi^T ^RT^T^TT^T 24,5«2001. ^^r -41<4td<4, ^Tll^f^, M<ytj^^< w^w^w^ WoP^No^ 906/2001e "W^ 200 ^STT^T ^"CTW ^ritcr Shri R,aj Kamal Singh l^learned counsel for the had not decided the case glven adequate opportunity pun.ishment by with-holding subsistence allowance alr< Dr^N<,K^Shukla suaniU the purview of the State •^p^pfl^ Trrq^Tf -^ •fe^t Tf^RZR ^'^Tf^TR ^3T?^^ petitionero Dr<»N-oK<oShu]<la^learne{5 Dy®AdvocafceGeneral^ for the Sfcate^ Heardo The petitionerts cas^ was first dealt wifeh by fche learned Additional Colp.ectore Being aggrieved by the order passed by the le^rned Additional Collector, an appeal was preferred be^ore the learned Collector^ In para 6 of theorder pas^ed by the learned Collector, it has been recorded that ^he learned Additiorial Collector in accordance with the provisions of law^ Ifc i-s also record^d that the petitioner was not for cros s-examination o However ^ on the same materlal reco^ded by the learned Additional Colleator@ the learned Co-llector passed an order ^£ one increment and furfcher that the petitioner would not bf entitled to any benefits other than ^ady paid to the petitionere that the matter is whoily within Admlnistrative Tribanal^inasniuch as the matter concerns the sefvice^ conditions of the petitioner, Nti^fe^ -+- 3-^^T '^TJ^ ^t^? ^^w^it^ Subbu< 3iri^r^^ (^f^s^?) •STI^I ^^IT^T ^f^ ^Rf^FfpT TfR^ff ^ fe^ Tfe^R ^' •3T^P:? -^?T -2h Upon careful perugal o£ Section 28 of the Administrative Tritounals that the State ^dministrbtive Tribunal should have jurisdiction - xn the mat|;er© Xct^l985^ I am of the view l^learned counsel for the • J iin certain situations^where tArithout jurisdiction ^ -^^s MreRaj Kamal Singh), petitioner submits that the authorlty has acted Court can well interfere|< I am Inclined to.bold that the petitloner should aoproach the Stajte Administaative Tribunal^ inasmuch as I am of the jview that the petitioner has cornplete remedy before therefore^ inclined not |the said authorityo I am^ ito 'accept this petition^ Zf preferably wlthin thre^ receipfc of the petitionej the pe/titioner approach^s the. State Admlnistrafcive Tribunal ^ the matter shjould be decided expeditiously, months from the date of,.^ With thAs directijon^ the pe^fcition i.s dip^sed of^ ,.x Sd/- Chief Justice GRPRJ—FS/3H— 1 /200 j —50.000. c^^ 'F^ ^'