(^ l^? BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COVRT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONBR W.P.fS) No.^??l Of 2011 .'^Raghurai Lal Sahu, S/o. Jeevdhan Ram Sahu, aged about 43 years, Caste Teli, R/o. Village Bhalour, Tahsild Manendragarh, District Koria (C.G.) Versus ! m '.^.r.h- RESPONDENTS ;1 ^^ ^.^w (y.^f /" l^fr' .<.«^^ The State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary Panchayat and Rural Development Department Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, G.E.Road, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) :2) Zila Panchayat, Koriya Baikunthpur (C.G.) through Chief Executive Officer :3) Janpad Panchayat, Manendragarh, District Koria (C.G.) through Chief Executive Officer B: WRTT PETITION UNDER ARTIC]LE^226LOF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA sn^r ?ii R-fi* 'tTafT STf^T sti+i 3sq- ^IIAII^, (STflu'ie, Rirtiyy . Ci3 • P- C&) ^°- A^J.^.e.fl. •wrar y^f;-^-^^-—^^^ 200 an^?r iraw C^f^si^) \ ' '—-•<.. TOIIW ^lf?ff SII^T SB : HON'BLE SHRI MANINDRlAMOHAN SHRIVASTAVA. J. 13.05.2011. Shri H.B. Agrawal, counsel for the petitioner. Shri N. Naha Roy, respondents, on advance copy. | . Heard. The grievance of the pel selection of Siksha Karmi Grad^ has been rejected and he has the counseling treating him ovej terms of advertisement and ^c advertisement, the petitioner is according to General Categofy according to Government circulai| entitled to five years relaxatiorj representation has been made b'1 various authorities including thj Executive Officer. Under the Chhattisgarh Tatha Sewa Ki Sharten) Rules,| Appellate Authority. If the petitio|ner Senfor counsel with K.S. Pawar, F|anel Lawyer for the State/ <=bllf<'f41-l ^WvS if^6 <r<nt!,i< ^aifinaK^r litioner is that in the matter of III, the petitjoner's candidature n()t been allowed to participate in age whereas according to the jccording to clause III of the entitled to relaxation in age Rules. He submits that (Annexure P/8) the petitioner is in age. It is submitted that the petitioner on 22.02.2011 to ife COIIector as also the Chief Pfanchayat Siksha Karmi (Bharti 2007, Collector is Designated is aggrieved by rejection of ^ kD -HC—78 'S^ei ^l^ldl *l<|cb r^i<<i<?i<<, »Tny'i<s,fSirii'y^ ..^?..:.'C:..(:;.s)...(u.t).:^.2:.,S.i^lJ •^' 200 an^TT XRR; (ipf^siqsr) sn^i w h-u* ^PV STT^T sft+llct) nimmi ?^ITW ^ifer a'n^i ~^-\ his candidature, he has remedy <ftl<lT<v1<ft'T +11+1^1? "Ef fS^^f^-^^ ^siRnsn^r of appeal on the grounds stated hereinabove. It is found that the petitio(ier has submitted an application to the Collector, which has nof been taken into consideration. Therefore, the representation si|bmitted by the petitioner may be treated as appeal under the pules and the Collector should decide the same on the groundsj relating to claim for relaxation of age of the petitioner. The appe^l may be decided expeditiously. With the aforesaid observ^tionsand directions, the petition stands disposed of. Ma^.^^•t"' Judge