HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGH AT BILASPUR (Hon. IVir. Justice PritinRer Diwaker) Wnt Petitin No. 255 of 2005 PETITiONER VERSUS RESPONDENT Prakash Ram Sonbhadra aged about 27 years, son of Shri Manrakhan Lal Sonbhadra, Assistant Teacher, Government Primary School, ViIIage Kuliya, Post Office Kaneri, Tahsil Balod, District Durg, M.P. State of Madhya Pradesh through Joint Director, Pub!ic Instructions, Durg Education Division, Durg, M.P. Shri V.G. Tamaskar counsei for the petitioner. Shri Yashwant Singh Thakur, Dy. A.G. for the respondent. WRIT PETST30N UNDER ARTSCLE 228/227 OF THE CONST!TUTION OF INDSA ORDER (01.07.2009) By the instant petition the petitioner has sought for a direction to the respondent/State not to fiii up 77 vacandes of Teachers by Direct Recruitment. According to the petition, 77 posts were sanctioned as js ciear from the advertisement dated 26.10.1989 (Annexure P-1). The petitioner's contention is that there is a great deal of stagnatin amongst the Assistant Teachers in Durg Education Division and therefore the respondent shoud be restrained from making direct recruitment agalnst the vacant posts of Teachers. As per the recruitment ruies, viz, the Madhya Pradesh Arajpatrit Tritlya Varg Shaikshanik Sewa (Amhavidyalayetar) Bharti Tatha Padonnati rX-A... 1Y^ '"^ -. ^L^ Nlyam, 1973, 50% of the posts of the teachers are required to be fiiied up by promotion of Departmentai candidates and the rest through direct recmitment. This petition is entirely misconceived. Sn the first piace there Ss nothing to show that any action has been initiated by the respondent to fiil up 77 posts which are reported to have been sanctioned as per the advertisement (Annexure-P-1) and this Court cannot take any cognizance of the said advertisement. it may also be mentioned that the petitioner himself has stated that 50% of the posts of teachers are required to be filled up by promotion and the rest by direct recruitment, therefore, ifthe respondent resorts to direct recruitment it cannot be said that it would be doing anything wrong or contrary to the rules. The respondent cannot be restrained from acting as per the ruies. The mere fact of the aiieged stagnation does not mean that direct recruitment sanctioned by the ruies cannot be resorted to. !f the petitioner is dissatisfied, he can approach the respondenVState to make amendment in the ruies, but as iong as the rule stands, the same has to be complied with. That apart, the similar issue was raised before the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal in several cases such as O.A. No. 2391/93 Shankariai Soni and four others v. State of M.P. and another, O.A. No. 2362/93 Rajeshwar Rao Kridatt and another v. State of M.P. and another, etc. and the Tribunai vide order datedr 4.1.1999 has dismissed al! those applications and the said orderi having not been chailenged by any one till date has attained finality. | Q^ }n view of the above fact and also on the ground pf parity, this petition has absolutely no force and the same is therefore dismissed. Sd/- PritinkerDiwaker Judge