^-" -3 ;~0 IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR fC.G.) WRIT^ETITIQN N0^ t-720n05 PETITIONER Y ^- }^\ ^\ ^-.-< \^^e ^•''f.^^^: ^s^$^^ ^^ Net Ram Sahu, son of Shri Veepat Ram Sahu, aged about 23 (45 presently) years, Ad-hoc Assistant Teacher, Government Primary School - Sarayee Set, Vikash Khand Pandariya, Blck North Pandariya, Tah. Pandariya, Distt. Kabeerdham / Kawardha (C.G.) resident of village Mahali Tah. Pandariya, Distt. Kawardha (CG) VERSUS RESPONDENTS The State of Chhattisgarh, through : the Secretary, Department of Education, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG) ^ The Director, Lok Shikshan Sanchalnalay, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG) The District Education Officer, Education Distt. Kawardha, (Chhattisgarh) The State of Madhya Pradesh through : the Secretary, Department of Education, Vallabh Bhawan,, Bhopal (Madhya Pradesh) The Secretary, Department of General Administration, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralay, Raipur, (Chhattisgarh) /f % WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1» 3^- ^wid4, t{iTn'y'i<o, Ri-ii^y ^5 .}^° ^' _J:L^\^.\S^ ssn^r^r f^iraisn^r sbli«hg1?(T aii^l^'wiWHfsa' +i.'<fci''n-i Hit<c'i)'tr'tecA<l:3iw]< ^sti^ran^T 7.4.2005 ShriA.N. Bhakta, couiisel Shri Akhil Agrawal, Panel I| Heard. The case of the petitioner ^ Departinent of erstwhile State| appoiatinent of ad-hoc Assi^tanl br the petitioner. .awyer for the State. s that m. fhe vear 1979 fhe Education of M.P. conducted a test for the Teachers ia the Govenunent Pninary pchools. In fhat test the petition^r was selected and accordingly, he was ippointed for a period of three iu^ lonfh. However, fhe services oi racaiicv which arises on acc< ^nths on a fixed salary ofRs.300/- per fhe petitioner were discontuiued and ^iint of the discontinuatioa of fhe ictitioner's services was fiUed 1|>y the State of M.P. Thereafter, the ^etitioner is regularly Biafcm§ represeutations for considermg fhe )etitioner to fhe appoiatment on fse post ofteacher. Further case ofthe )etitioner is fhat in the year 1997) vide Annexure P-3 fhe erstwhile State 4f M.P. took a decision to app<|>tat the ad-hoc teachers ia place of $hiksba Karmi but same is no1j beiag impleinented by fhe State of phhattisgarh. Learaed counsel for fhe pe^tioner submits that petitioner niay be to respondeut No.2 raising all his fo.2 be directed to decide tus counsel for the respondent has no sel for fhe parties aad haviag regard fhe case, fhe petitioner is aUowed to XI-HC-22 ^^ 3^'^rraRTO', ^Tn^'is, Riwi'yy ?T^5|<h HWWI sh*<]ch V^ 200 sii^r^iT R-fi+sn^r sbH gf?(T ail^] (•wiWflfN tii<ifi-i<fl'< HiiMTtftec^<Ri«;i< ^sri^pTsn^r t'espondent No.2 raisiag all his |s directed to decide fhe represen three xuonfhs froin fhe date o; ;onsidertag aU fhe grievances r^ ivith law. With fhe direction aforrisaid Consequently, M.(W.)P. Np. jiisposed of. Certified copy as per rules. g^ievauces and ia tum respondent No.2 (tation of the petitioner wifhin aaother receipt of the representation after ^ised by the petitioner ia accordauce [, the petition stauds disposed of. 11045/05 & I.A. No.2534/05 also stand Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge