giGHWM COURT OF £HHATTI$GnRH QILASF‘UR Elitj‘emion (3) No. 344$ of 2008 Petitioner {CG}. Raigarh (CG) Daipat Singh Netam, Slot 8hri Ghanshyam Sinqh Netam, aged about 58 years, Assistant Teas Raigar'n (CG). Versus Resgohéems 3’) State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary, Schoo} Education Department, D.K.S, Bhawan} Raipur 2) The Secretary, Generai Administration Department, D.K.S, Bhawen, Rapur (CG). Raigarh (CG). ii} Biock Education Gfncer, Kharsia, District (wm Petftion under Amcle 226!227 of the Const%tution of india} $3: Hon’bie Mr. $ai§sh K. Agriéhotri, J. 8hr? BL. Dembra, counsetforthe petitioner. Shn’ M P S Bhaiia, Gov? Advocate forthe State @RAL §§E§R Wassed on 4‘“ day ofJuly, 2098) With consent of both the parties, the matter is heard fmaily. I Distri'ct Pre§eé1tk~ “ W ; to second Kramonnati as per circui {Annexure P12) after completion of 24 yeax’s of servi i‘nai the issue invoived in the present petition has a by this Coun’ (WP.N0.2865/2E§D2) by judgmem and o submits that the petitioner the case of the petitioner in the Court in ine manei' Learned oounsei appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitied ar dated 244—2068 read with ’i7-3-1999/19-4~1 999 cei Learned counsei further submits iready been considered and decideo in the matter of RS. Verma Vs. State of Chhaitisgarh and others rder dated 29-8—2QO6. Learned counsei further may be granted iiberty to make a representation to consider iight of the judgment passed by the Hen’bie Supreme of state of Tripura and others Vs. K.K. Rey (2604 SCWI‘i) and the order passed in RS. Verma (supra), to wnicn iearned counsel appearing for the respondents/State has no objection. 2) I Accordingiy, iiberty sought for by the petitioner is granted to make a representation before the concerned authorities 3) in view of the above, the petition is disposed of with the aforesaid/1W / Raju 53“ sd!‘ hotf'l Judge Govt. Primary Schooi Tiur, Bieck Kharsia, Distriet her, 3) Assistant Commissioner, Raigarh, } i ‘ .Sh K. Ag“