^ i3S&;ii.. •u^ :^'tl- W THE HONABLE fflGH COURT OFJUDICATURE OF CIflIATTISGARH AT^ILASPUR C.G. W. P. No..............J..<^J..l...............2005 rf ^...•^v ^0'"^'1 ..^ ^'y^-"^ '^"^-•^ ^ PETITIONER. Hariish Kumar Meshram aged 23 years son of Late Shri Netram Meshram, Sammvida Sala Sikchhak Verg - 3. Bhilai Tahsil Gunderdehi, , District Durg (C.G.) Versus Respondent f*^^ -i-'i-•'?""!!—U'l>-;r ^ x?T?CEi-v '^ J ^,&'-~"to—^^ y'-^'0'. 1. The State Govemment of Chhattishgarh, Through the Secretary,School Education Deptt D.K.S.Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The District Education Officer, Durg (C.G.) Cl£3&to Writ Petition imder Articles 226/227 of the Constitution oflndia. XI-HC-22 *fT><(TTgiKTra) 3^ -^ww^, aTflwie, [s|diy^< 3<1^1 ia?b (<?. *~^J * * * •? H^ 200 SD^T^T f^iNi^n^r Sb4P:h ^Tf?cT S«i sn^rrefTWBf^r 18.4. Shri Aiav Shrivastava, couns^ Shri Akhil Agrawal, Panel Lavifyer for the State. By this writ petition under Art The case of the petitioner is been appointed as cpntract teacher °ni<iFn<fl-f iwi-]Tfftei^t<Ri«i< ^sTRriTsn^T forthspetitioner. lcle 226/227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed for regular aj5pointment from 08.7.2002 on the post of Assistant Teacher. Ithat his father Late Netram Meshram, who |ent, died in hamess on 29.10.1997. The was working in Education Departm|er petitioner's father was the sole bre^d earner in the family and on account of sudden death of petitioner's fath^r there is no source of income of the petitioner's family, therefore, the ^etitioner had applied for appointment on compassionate ground. The petitiofier's application was allowed and he has vide order dated 08.7.2002 (Annexure P-2). Further case of the petitioner is ttiatjig "ught to have been.appointed on ^aA&-)u -..._ ,__,,_" _ _ ^ .h ' ' regular basis as per 'r^teaton [Mo.F-7-4/2002/1-5 dated 10"' June, 2003 issued by the iVlinistry of General |Administration Department, Govt. of C.G., Raipur. I Counsel for the petitioner ar^ued that as per sub-clause (3) of Clause 6 of the above scheme of compass|onate appointment the petitioner ought to have been appointed as a regula|r employee and he could not have been appointed as daily wager or ad-hocj basis or on the contract basis. Sub-clause (3) of Clause 6 of the said schen^e envisages that the prescribed 5% posts meant for compassionate appointm|ent shall be filled in by regular appointment provided the applicant is qualified ^nd against that 5% posts the appointment shall not be made on daily wage, acj-hoc or contract basis. 1 have perused the petition a(id sub-clause (3) of Clause 6. ii^ XI-HC-22 sn^rw (N^sn^r I»i*<i«h(ffsg' (.? ,-~^nl^ '3^ 'S^ -^ww<i, aTfly'is, (ciciiuy 3ii^l ^acb *nw-iTgT!Tra?"'""'""""""""""""'"^ 200 If W^l ^WIWBfi?T doulnse Perusai-of the petition it available and against that posts the circumstances, leamed coi petitioner may be allowed to mak} ail his grievances and also in the learnedcounsel for the respondeijits Having heard learned facts and circumstances of the| representation within a period o| raising all his grievances and representation of the petitioner points raised by the petitioner 2002/1-5 dated 10th June, 2003 i4s Department, Govt. ofC.G., Raipi|ii of receipt ofthe representation. With the direction aforesai^ Certified copy as per rules[ st)i''<f<n<l1-f ii*i<-]Tfftec3'<Ri«K ^Sf^lTSn^T is not clear that Whether 5% posts were tfie petitioner has been given appointment. In |nsel for the petitioner submitted that the (je a representation to respondent No.1 raising |ight ofsaid scheme dated 10.6.2003, to which has no objection. for the parties and having regard to the case, the petitioner is allowed to make a two weeks from today to respondent No.1 in turn respondent No.1 shall decide the |n accordance with law afterconsidering the ind also in the light of Scheme No. F-7-4 / ^sued by the Ministry of General Administration ^r within a period of two months from the date , the petifion stands disposed of.'Sdl- L.C. Bhadoo re (^^l^)