^^^E^^^^-^;' . 5^^s^^%-s^i^ ^:^^&^!S^;!lt ^!^ ^^B^^I .^B ^•f-^p/^ INTHE M.P. STATE ADMINISTRATIVETF ORIGINAL APPLICAT10N No. Applicant : Ra esh VERSUS NON-APPLICANTS/ RESPONDENTS tCT; ^LATRAIPUR )of1998 KumarTamboli Aged about 36 years Son of Shri Shyamji Tamboli Resident of Bada Bazar, Mungeli Post, Thana, Block &Tah. Mungeli ,. Distt. Bilaspur (M.P.) (Ex-Mansevi Sahayak Shikchhak, previously appointed on due selection and eligibilities against the vacant post of Asstt. Teachers, under the Edn. Deptt. of Govt. of M.P.) (•() State.ofM.P. :~ Through Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Valtabh Bhawan, Bhopal (M.P.) (2) Commissioner of Public Instructions,. Govt. of M.R, Education Deptt., Directorate of Public Instructions, (DPI Office), Near Chetak Bridge, Bhopal (M.P.) (3) Deputy Director of Public Instructions Govt. of M.R, Education Deptt. Education Distt. Bilaspur, P.0. Bilaspur (M.P.) (4) Block Education Officer Govt. Qf M.R, Education Deptt. P.0. Munaeli. Tah. Munaeli. Distt. Bilaspur (M.P.) Si3!Tunder sectiorLl 9_oHhe Administrative Tribunal Act 1985 (No.13 of 1985) read with Articles 6, 21 & 31_l^lhe Constitution of India. considered with Principles of Natural and Social Justiee. '14 PARTICULARS OF APPLICATION 1. Particulars of ApDticant : As in CauseTitle. 2. Partjculars of Non - Applicant : As in Cause Title. 3. Particulars ofthe Orders against which the application is made: The Applicant is not aggrieved by any particular orders but is aggrieved by the action of the Non-Applicants/Respondents, in not considering the demand of Justice in the case of the Applicant, by reinstatement/re-appointment and regularisation as Asstt. Teascher on the regular scale of pay and changing the Education Policies every now & then • andviolating the Mandatory Provisions ofArticles 14, 16,21 and 311 ofthe Constitution of India and also the Principles of Natural and Social Justice, Equity and Fair Play in Administration and abusing their powers in the matter of public employment. A. :1 .. ^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR S.B. : HON'BLE MR. SATISH K. AGNIHOTM, J. WRIT PETITION (S.) N0.2553 OF 2005 Petitioner Ramesh Kumar Tamboli versus Respondents State ofM.P. and others Present : Mr. Alok Nigam, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Ajay Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer for the respondents/State. ORDER (Passed on 7th ofSeptember, 2006) It is submitted that the facts and question of law involved in the present petition are same to that of in Ram Sahay Jha vs. State ofMadhya Pradesh cmd others (Original Application No. 15/1995). The Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur, by itsjudgment and order dated 16-2-1996, allowed the application of the petitioner therein. Leamed counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to appyoach the respondents/State for consideration and disposal of the petitioner's •y&^SS^^s~i^^:. Gopal case in teniis ofthe order dated 16-2-1996 passed in the case of Ram Sahay Jha (Supra) by Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur. 2. Leamed counsel appearing for the respondents/State fairly agrees with the submissions made by leamed counsel for the petitioner. 3. Accordingly, the petitioner is granted liberty to make a representation before the respondents - State Authorities for their decision on the representation in the light ofthe order dated 16-2- 1996 passed in the case of Ram Sahay Jha (Supra), in accordance with law, on its own merit, within reasonable time. CSr;i 4. With the above-stated liberty, this petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Certified copy as per mles. ^'^»t" ^^^ 'T"i^'1T!'"'ii ,-iiil: i'. -'> ;'?.'-i'^'' S?