f*" ^A IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S.) N0. 2^b^/2011 PETITIONER ^^..l.?^^".- ^•';:^^\s}3"""" ^'•••'"\- „^•-""..^•'v'^..'- o^^'^^-y"" .^^t^E ^^* fl.v'a''. ..•••"" •••" Laxmi Naravan Lahare S/o Shri Tulshi Ram Lahare, aged about 34 years, R/o Gharshoda ward No.4, Tahsil Gharghoda, Dist Raigarh (C.G.) -w VERSUS RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh Through : The Secretary Panchayat & Rural Development Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The Additional CoUector Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) The Chief Executive Officer, JUa Panchayat Raigarh, Dist Raigarh (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA s?—— y K •^' ^ "s ; /*i ' i j^-i »-~»,; i "* •"= /~i. -° .'"i ; n i .". —y i ^s f~^ ft }~-; j ; . ?=- 3 } A .'*^ ?°-'•: -ilU"i UUUK 1 Ui- CnriAI I lyi-iAK- : iaiLASsh" PETJTJONEF RESPONDENT WRn"_°ET!T!ON iS^ N0. OF 2011 Laxmi Naravan Lahai Versus State of Chhattisciarh & Others Wm Petition undsrArticie 226 ofthe Constitution of india) Singis Bench : Hon'ble Shri Sstisn K. Agnihctri, J. Present:- Shri S.K.Dadsena, Advocate forthe petltioner. Shri Y.S.Thakur, Dy. Advocats Gsnsrai forthc Stats. ORDER iORAD (Passsd on this 02"c day of May, 2011) 1. Learnsd counssi appearino- for the oetitioner submits that the petitioner being aggrieved by hls non-appolntment, on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-!!), has fiied an aopeai berore the Additionai Coiiector, Raigarh, on 20.08.2009. The same is pending consideration without any rhyme and rsason. Thus, the Additional Coliector, Raigarh, may be directed to declde the issue expeditiousiy, in view of the nature of the dispute pending consioerasion. Be that as it may, in normal course, the authorities should not be dlrecied to decide the expeditiously without knowing the facts of the case. However, since the non-appolntment of the petitioner on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-!!! ss involved and the matter is oending for about two vears, it is just and expedient to direct the Additionsi Co'lector, Raigarh, to consider the pending appeai anc decide the same exoeditiousiv. Learned counsel appearing for the State respondents has no ^i-^l/=..r^~;/· 'i^i-.^t-'^i^! ..•^."^; ^••r^"';..1^?^ 4. ]n "iew of foreaoina, the writ oetition stands disposed of. No order •^ ~ " -^' asto costs. 3L< Satish K. Agnihotri Judge