s S.B. (Service Matter) IN THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARH) WRIT PETITIONfS) N0.- /2011. PETITIONER:.:- ^< f^V Ku.Devanti, daughter of Bhulan ~\\-—^^^-t '<^\.^^^.-'""' ..•'" Ram, aged about 28 years, Cook, /..-t ...•' c,\«\rA.-v .^-"y^ ^yy^ '^^•^ ^8'"'^ ^. ^..^ '{SMyl^^t^ fe. ^^'^. ^s^ 'l Pahadi Korwa, Ashram Jagima. Block Shankargarh, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. versus Respondents 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, D.K.S.Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3^ Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Sarguja,, Chhattisgarh. 4. Collector, Sarguja, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. 5. Block Education Officer, Block Shankargarh, District Sarguja, Cbhattisgarh. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OFTHE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA L -HC—78 3?1^F ^T ?<'li4i T[^?T ^TR^T'sFHW ~~\ HWWt 9i^l<^» '3^T "4t^l<ri^, ^•y^Ko, f®l(n!'(-!^< .^.e.^..Mi/.n^200 ^TT^T TI?W ( y<^^) '^HW^f^T^T^T FSB ; Hon'ble Shri Manindrs 22.6.2011 SIm C.J. K. Rao withj petitioner. Shri N. Naha Roy, copy. Leamed coiinsel for tt relating to claim of conto employees came up for cons| No.2004/11 and bat.ch of the petitioners, fhis Cou| case in those cases. He sub^ covered by the aforesaid ord^ On the ofher hand, that the representation of due veritlcation. of pejtiti Mter going throiigh tljie W.P. (S) No.2004/11, it is s^ is squarely covered by petitioner is also entitled to Accordingly, it is dired representation before the co ^l^fenft^ ^TR^ff "^ f^t Tf^5K ^T^tRTH ^TT^T Mohan Shrivastava.LJ.l Shri Akshay Yadav counsel for fhe Patiel Lawyer for the State, on advance ic petitioner submits that the issue LCtual payment to Cook and other [deration before this Court in W.P. (S) ^itions and att.er examining fhe claim Ft had directed consideration of the paits that the case of the petitioner is ^r. le^med counsel for the State siibmits t|ie petitioner would be decided atter order dated 15.4.2011 passed in parent that the case of tlie petitioner aforesaid order. Therefore, fhe same direction in the case. titie t|he [ed that tf fhe petitioner makes fresh |icemed aufhority^ claimnig payment 'i -^ 'Tf ^ Yfc^XI-HC—78, -^ '3~^r -^i^w^, '&^f\w\(o, [^(ni-M^< WSfVff «»*licb "^200 3TT^T Tf?^' ((iGlij<sl<^) ^TT^r^r^Nr ^f^T W^T^P^F Praveea ^nw^ftpr^T^r of mmimum wages applicabl Chhattisgarh Civil Service (C the same shaU be disposed period of eight weeks fr^m fhe date of submission of representation. In the event would be at liberty to tlle writ WitJi fhe aforesaid diro of. CM^F<n^1i ^w^S ^? fg^St <py}^l< i:r3?Rp:T<3T^r ^ to a contract employee under ttie Jontract Appointment) Rules, 2004, |>f in accordance with law, within a |3f any adverse order, the petitioner Ipetition alresh< ^tion, fhe petition is finally disposed Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge r-