.3 . Srosl& BeiiCh^^y^' IN_THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WMT PETITION (Sl N0^^^L2006 PETITIONER !^' x\A ^^^.. -"i^ -^w Girdhari Ram Yadav^ Aged about 35 years S/o Late Shri Jayokumar Yadav, Assistaat Teacher, Adim Jati Kalyan Prathamik shalla, Pandaripani Vikaskhand JASHPUR District: Jashpur (CG) \(:-~' '^ VERSUS RESPONDENTS /~ ^ .-^ ^y / S5 ,~!}v .^ ^ ^v^ i 1. State of Chhattsgarh / Through - The Secretary, Adim Jati Tatha Anusuchitjanjati Department, Mantralay, D.K. S. Bhawan, RAIPUR (CG) 2. The Appellate Authority,^. Department ofTrible Welfare, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralay RAIPUR(CG). 3. The Commissioner ^ Tribal Welfare department ^ y; StateofChhattisgarh RAIPUR(CG) •i€l^y •^-S^KSf,^'^-^' \^ 4. The Assistant Commissioner ^ (Trible Welfare) JASH£UR(CG) 5. The Collector ^ JASHPUR(CG) 6. TheCollector /- Trible Welfare Department JASHPUR fCG) i':'i5s;K"=f?':'?=?^@EiK3^ ^^.-•c':""-t^r:^... ^"..s w^s!fs tj t * Si ^:i^ ^. 7. The Chief Executive Officer^ Janpat Panchayat, JASHPURNAGAR 8. The Chief Executive Officer/' District Panchayat, JASHPUR (CG) 9. Shri Baldev Ram Bhagat/" Assistant Teacher, Primary School Pandripani, Vikaskhand Jashpur JASHPUR(CG) 10. Ku. Shilpa Subha Kuzur / Shikhsa Karmi Grade-III Prathmik Shala Pandripani, Vikaskhand Jashpur, Distt. JASHPUR (CG). 11. Ku. Afrozjahan ,- Shakshakarmi Grade III Upper Primary School Raikona Vikaskhand JASHPURrcG) ^E WRIT PETITON UNDER ARTICLE 226/217 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF THE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS ,CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER DIRECTION OR ORDER TO DO JUSTICT IN THE MATTER r^ HI6H COURT OF CHH/kTTES6ARH_AT_BXLASPl& S.B. : Hon'bte Mr. Satish K. Aanihotri. j\ t 1 Petitioner Respondents W. P. (s) No. 4916 of 2006 6irdhari Ram Yadav versus State of ChhatCisgarh <& others Present: Shri Uttam Pandey, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Satish Supta, t)y. Govt. Advocate for the respondents/State. ORDER (Passed on 8th September, 2006) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was working os Assistant Teacher <md wos posted at tiie relevant time in Primary School, Pandaripani, Developinent Block-Jashpur. 2. By order dated 5.7.2006 (Annexure P/7), service of the petitioner wos transferred from Primary Schoo!, Pandariponi, Development Block-Joshpur- to Block Development Resources Centre, Manora, District-Jashpur as Supportive Teaeher under the Rationalization (yuktiyuktkaran) Policy, 2006. 3. Bein9 aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an oppeal before the respondent No. 3/Commissioner, Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Welfare Department, Chhattisgarh, Raipur. The respondent No. 3, by order dated 8.8.2006 (Annexure P/15), dismissed the appeal. _ f ^l 4. The petitioner has challenged the impugned oreter dated 8.8.2006 passed by the respondent No. 3/Commissioner on the ground •that the appeal is not maintainable before the respondent No. 3, but the oppeal is maintainable before the respondent No.l/Secretary, Adim Jati Tatha Anusuchitjanjati. Thus, consideration and decision of the respondent No. 3 is bad in law. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not press any other point. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the records, it is evident that under clouse-7 of the Rationalization (yuktiyuktkaran) Policy, 2006 the appeal is maintainable to the Commissioner against the order possed by the Assistant Commissioner. Thus, contention of the petitioner cannot be countenonced. The impugned order was possed by the Assistant Commissioner and the appeal was rightly considered and decided by •the respondent No. 3/ Commissioner, Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Welfare Development, Chhattis9arh, Raipur as per Rationalization C/uktiyuktkaran) Policy, 2006. 6. There is no merit in this case. Thus, the writ petition is dismissed accordingly. No order as to costs. Sd/- SatishK. Agnihotri Judge Bablu