SWGLE gENM‘N BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. éLi‘w OF 2011 / PETITIONER Harshwardhan Mishra @ H.W. Mishra , S/o Parmeshwar Mishra, Aged about 56 years, Head Master, Govt. Middle School Junadjh Block Gharghoda, District Raigarh, C.G. R/o Mahaveer Chowk Gali, Baikunthpur, Raigarh, C.G. ‘VERSUS RESPONDENTS : 1/ State of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Department of Scheduled Tribe and Scheduled Caste development, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) Commissioner, Department of Scheduled Tribe and Scheduled Caste development, Raipur, C.G. S.R. Pandey, Lecturer, Govt. Middle School Charama, District Norh Bastar Kanker, C.G. 4. Smt. Meena Panikar, Lecturer, Govt. Higher Secondary School Bishrampur, Ambikapur District Sarguja, C.G. 5. Smt. Supreeti Som, Lecturer, Govt. Middle School Makhanpur, District Korba, C.G Mohammad Abrar, Lecturer, Govt. Middle School Chhindiya Baikunthpur, District Koriya, C.G. Ayodhya Prasad, Lecturer, Govt. Higher Secondary School Godhi District Korba, C.G. @7 Anil Kumar Tankachan Lecturer, Govt. Higher Secondary ‘V School (Boy). Kareetgaon, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, C.G x WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. x HIGH COURT GF CHHATTISGARH AT EILA$PUR SB : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITINKER DIWAKER w.?.gsp.No. 6489/2011 PETITIaNER Harshwardhan MiShra Vel‘Sus RESPONDENTS Stats-9f QG. 83 Others Shri Satyendra Sahu, counS61 for the. yetitioner. Shri Praveen Das, Dy.G.A. for thé Siam. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ORDER (03.11.2013 Grievance of th6 psti1ioner in the prasent petition is that he is entitlad for his promotion to tho post of Lecturer fmm that of Headmaster but ignon'ng his case his juniors have been promoted. Contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that the purpose of filing this petition would be served if direction is issued to the resp. N02 to decide the pending representation of the petitioner. State counsel points out that the petitioner has made representations on 14.09.09 and 23.07. 10 and therefore at this stage, he is not aware about the present factual position. He submits that. let the petitioner make a fresh representation to the respondent N02 and in turn the same would be decided in accordance with law. In View of above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to make a n‘esh representation before the respondent No.2 within three weeks from today and it is expected from the respondent No.2 to decide the same as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and the authority concerned would be at liberty to decide the same strictly in accordance with law. Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge