PETmONER HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR RESPONDE^7TS WRIT PETmON No. 2573 of2006 Chaitanya Ram Krishna Das Patre, Son of Shri Sajjan Das Patre, aged about 36 years, Resident of village Manpur, Post Navagarh, DistrictDurg(C.G.) VE.RSUS Chhattisgarh Board of Secondary Education, Raipur, Through: The Secretary, Ciihattisgarh Board ofSecondar^r Educatiori, Raipur (C.G.) Tlie Regional Officer, Clriiattisgarii Board of Secondap-7 Education, Bilaspur (C.G.) 2. \VBITPETmON UNDERARTICLE_22&'227_OF Jlffi^CQNSTITUTroNOFiNDIA p—piCpifTit" i. ASSuAl*-. Shri P.P.Sahu, Advocate for tfae petitioner. Shri R.S.Patel, Advocate forthe res Amit (Passed on 05°'day of January, 2009) Leanied counsel appearing for the petitioner submite that the ease of llie petitioner is that the petitioaer has never received any show cause notice. Per coatra, Sfari Patel, leamed counsel appearing for the respondents submits that tfae petitioner has been issued a show cause notice dated 6.12.2004 (Aimexure R;'l) by registered post calliag upon the petitioner to file his respoase wifhin a period of 15 days. The petitioner has failed to submit 'nis response. Thus, the impugned order dated 02.05.2005 was passed after eonsidering all the facets of the matter. Be that as it may, without going into the facts of the case asto whether show cause notice was received by Ihe petitioner or not, in the intsrest ofjustice, it is desirable that the petitioiier be graiited libert\.- to make a representatioa to the respondents. In tuiT4 the respoadents, keeping in view the facts ofthe case where the eareer ofthe petitioner is involved by order ofcancellation ofhis mark-sheet, are directed to consider his representation in accordance wifh law and pass appropriate order, within a period ofthree weeks from tiie date ofreceipt ofthe representation filed by the petitioner, ifso filed. In view offlie above-stated facts, the impugaed order dated 02.05.2005 stands quashed. No order asto costs. ,._-—- -tehyom