IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT - BILASPUR w.P. (s No.‘:+?-$L1 I 2010 BETWEEN 1. Deve‘ndra Prasad Sahu , aged about 47 years, S/o Late Shri Man‘ Singh Sahu. occupation sewice- working on the post of Plumber Fitter, Government Polytechnic , Durg, G. E, Road, Durg, District Durg (CG). 2. /Dinesh Kumar Dhruv Slo Late Shri Shiv Charan Dhruv, aged about 35 years, occupation service, working on the post of Electrician. Govemment Polytechnic , 'Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (CG). PETITIONERS AND 1. The State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary Technicai Education Men Power , Mantraiay at D.K.S.Bhawan, Chhattisgam, Raipur (CG). The Director, Directorate of Technical Education, Chhattisgarh, Raipur (CG). The Prin<§pal‘,"Goi/emment Polytechnic, Durg, G.E. Road, Durg, District Durg (CG). The Principal , Govemment Polytechnic, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (CG). RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITIOE QIA 2g6 OF’THE CONSTITION OF lNDlA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN NATURE OF MANDAMUS CERTIORARY PROHIBWION ETC. é‘y . ..... 311w upwwg m L231 éE .....................m ................................................ mmmm r"...._-,_L_ wwwwiwmg $Wm B : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITI KER DIWAKER 09.12.2010 Shri Rakesh Anthony, caunse for the petitioners; Shri Praveen Das, Dy. GA. for the State‘ Grievance of the petitioners n the present petition are that despite recommendation of Brahm Swaroop Samiti regarding the revised pay scale, the same has no been granted to the petitioners though they are entitled for the sam Counsel for the petitioners s bmits that the representation of the petitioners dated 2.6. 10 (Annexu e 13/7) is aiready pending before the Secretary and the ends ofjustic would be served if at this stage, direction is issued for deciding his p ding representation. State counsel submits that et the petitioner Inake a fresh representation to the respondent N .3 after supplying the same to the resp. No.2 detailing their cla and in turn the competent authority may be directed to decide he representation in accordance with law. Accordingly, the petitioner 's permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to make a fresh presentation. In the eventuality of making any such representation the petitioner with in a period of three Weeks’ from the date of re eipt of copy of this order, it is expected from the authority conce ed to decide the same within a further period of six months from the date of its receipt. It is made clear that this Cou has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and therrautho ty concerned would be at liberty to decide the representation stri tly in accordance with law, considering all the aspects of the ca . S e i e s