(0^5 ? |w»«NNI—»: IN THE HON'BLE HI6H COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR WRrTPETTTIONfS)NO.^^ /2009 PETTTEONER RESPONbENTS VERSUS 1. ^f^ ^€-> '^••••••"" 3. Alexander Xalxo, aged about 60 years, Son of Shri Yacub Xalxo, "Head Master", Govt. Primary School - Birsingdih, Block - Sarangarh, Tahsil- Sarangarh, bistt- Raigarh (C.G.) The State of Chhattisgarh, Through- The Secretary, Department of School Education, Mantralaya, bau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The bistrict Education Officer, District - Raigarh (C.G.) The Block Education Officer, Block- Sarangarh, District - Raigarh (C.G.) WRTT PETTTION U/A - 226 OF THE CONSTTTUTION OF INDIA r.HC—78 ^n^T^il^N' T|S?T 3n^i ^>*<i<^ '3'^ <^|'Mi<n<{, t$^l)wi<o, [®«rtl^1^ ^_....W:...P.....®.......^>ix.L N(A4^l shNlesb""•'"""""" """"""•"'••"'••^•^200^/ ^1^1 ^ffi ( ^i^^T) ^^ffW^fN^^T SB_:_HON'BLE SHRl'J'UCTICE ^Nfo^l ^yR^f ^f fe^ '^f^R '^a^RR^l^T 04.Q9.2Q09 Shri Roop Naik, counsel Shri Vivek Sharma, P.L. Contention of the couns) idenfcical matters have been de<| issue and he has filed copyj 813/2007 (Rai-n Kumar Sahu He contends that as the casel stage he may be permitted to| make representation before competent authority be dir^ expeditiously. State counsel contends statement before this Court aj identical to the case as aforeni the same shall be decided strict Accordingly, the petitioij: concemed respondent within receipt of copy of this order^ th a further period. of four months It is made clear that t] |br the petitioner. for the State. ^l for the petifcioner is that number of ?ided by this Gourt involving the same of one such order as W.P.(S) No. .5 Others Vs. State of C.G. 85 another), of the petitioner is identical, at this withdraw this petition with liberty to the competent authority and the icted to decide the representation :hat at this stage he cannot make any 3 to whether case of the petitioner is entioned. However, he submits that if the petitioner makes a repres^ntation to the concemed respondent, ,ly ln accordance with law. is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty as aforesaid. !f the petjitioner makes a representation to the period of one month from the date of same is expected to be decided within from the date of its receipt. is Court has not commented on the merits ofthe case and the autiiorities concerned are free to decide the representation of the petitioneq strictly in accordance with law. Sd/- pritinkerDiwaker judge 2^> y^