0% 1% smGLE mm @5/ IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH@ AT BILAspUR w.p.tsy No. L4 C V)? ' /2o11 PETITIONER / B. R‘ Chouhan, S/o Late Shri Dansena, aged about 61 years, Working as Head Master, T.W.D Middle School, Chongribahar, Block —Kansabe1 , Distt.- Jashpur (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS /1. Union of India Through :- The Secretaly, Elementary Education and Literacy Department, Human Resource Development Ministry, New Delhi. State of Chhattisgarh, Throughz— The Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department ‘ D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur(C.G.). Mission Director, State Project Office, Rajeev Gandhi 'Shiskha mission (Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan), Raipur (C.G.). The Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare'Department, Jashpur Distt—Jashpur (C . G .) /r5. Distt. Project Director, Rajeev Gandhi Shiksha mission (Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan), Jashpur (C.G.). 6. Block Education Officer, jw Kansabel, Distt-Jashpur(C.G.). @ Kamleshwar Ram Bhagat, s/o Not Known aged about 45 years working as Upper Division Teacher, Middle School, Bansbahar, Block— kansabel, Distt— Jashpur (C.G.). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA gamma 3mn—q; W I0}? é) we Hrzfa’ WW“mm Ft 200 g3 m m (WKH) I. V...V mm m mam ma??? 'mrrc‘E V§ @z‘t 1W ' % #faq 31ml ’ 11-08-2011 , Shri'Shashank Thakur, co nsel for the petitioner. Shri H.S. Ahiuwalia, couns l for respondent No.1. Shri N.Naha Roy, Panel Heard. The grievance of the petiti ner, as set out in this petition is that vide impugned order dated 6/7/2011 issued by respondent No.6, the charge of the office of Cluster in-charge, C ongribahar has been taken away from him and respondent Nor? has been handed over the charge, who is only an Upper Division Teacher and un er the policy, an Upper Division Teacher cannot be posted as Cluster ln-c arge. He submits that without verifying the reason for petitioner’s absence i the meeting, the Block Education Officer passed the order. The grievance of the petiti ner is that the charge of the post has been, for the time being, taken awa from him, however, it is seen that no disciplinary action has been tak n against the petitioner. Therefore, l am not inclined to interfere with the rder. However, as far as the posting of the petitioner is concerned, the petit oner may prefer representation to the next higher authority i.e. District Proje tDirector Jashpur who shall consider and decide petitioner’s representatio against order dated 6/7/2011 With the aforesaid observ Ions the petition is fnaiiy disposed off er for the State/respondents 2, 4 and 6. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge L SB : Honble Shri Manindra Moha Shrivastava J.