@5;^^'ls :^ ^£~?.U'"M ;SSP!isiL£ ilti'aw*! ..J.<?^&^::: p-ft-^:"""'^fi:fy^.--" Pteserttu^\<S}^c..--- daVed---'1' u IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH WRIT PETITION No. /// /2006 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS ^<y <?&i>' ^ ^%-T ^ ••"' ' y jl^ ^ -^sy Ai'o^ ^ Rai Singh Ushare S/o Shri Mer Singh Ushara aged about 32 years, R/o - Village - Dulortola Block- Manpur, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) VERSUS •^l. State of Chhattisgarh Through - Secretary, Panchayat 8s Rural Development Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Manpur Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 3. Head Master, Vaikalpik (Unnayan) Primary School, Dulortola, Manpur Distt. Rajnandgaon PETITION UNDER ARTICLE'"226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^ fes5?S i'^<-?^: y ••aKte XI-HC—78 c^ sffi^t^i'ifeim WT SiT^T ?R5TW NINCTI a<NK*» 's^ •*\ww*<,wSwi<v,T^w'Qy. r^.^^"--1^"^ 2006 sn^'i'q^i' ('yfl'i'^) fiwiwt 'Htel s^y SB: Hon. Mr. Justice Pritiriker Diwaker 30.06.2009: Shri Anup Majumc? Shri Yashwant S| Smitha Ghai PL fcji Shri Amrito Das cfunse Case of the petitioner isj Instructor in Panchayat ar(d Subsequently, after up-gradalji' under Sarva Shiksha Abhiya^ scale of contract teacher Gr^de was terminated from service is the said termination order petition. the Contention of the coun^ filing of the present petition, vide order dated 29.6.2006 now the limited relief of the salary for the period 22.2.200? to 'bWiritfl') 'WRff *i fS^S <fa«$]< ^sffinsmsi ar counsel for the petitioner. ngh Thakur Dy. AG and Smt. the respondents No. 1 and 3. for respondent No.2. that initially he was appointed as Rural Welfare Department. ion, he was apppinted as Guru Ji scheme and was given the pay S. Thereafter, the petitioner ride order dated 22.2.2006 and it which is under challenge in this >el for the petitioner is that after petitioner has been reinstated g>assed by responderrt No.2 and |j|etitioner is in respect of grant of 129.6.2006. It- siltww WM 'tTtff sn^T'gfRT^ ^ )T 'S^ '^ww<i, ®fl1'M'l<o,fsieii'ylj,< Nl««119)W«h "^200 411^!(1 ''ra^ ( iqt^l^) wnwdfCTaii^t -2.- scheme and the salary for th direction for deciding the sa payment of salary for the *l<l!ff41-< MWvS'? fezt <ra<$i< ^siRn sii^n Counsel for the petitio^ier submits that the petitioner isa very low paid employe^ and under the compelling circumstances he is workin^ as Guru Ji. He further submits that the respondents have ^ot sufficient fund under the said s aforesaid period can be given to him by them. Lastly, he subr(iits that the petitioner would make a suitable representation tcji respondent No.2; and seeks a me sympatheticaily and to make aforemerrtioned period. To this submission of the counsel <or the petitioner, cpunsel for the respondents, have no objectjon. ; Accordingly, the respcjndent No.2 is direeted to decide the representation, if any, jmade by the petitioner within a period of three weeks fromjthe date of its receipt strictly in accordance with law. 1 ; The petition is thus dis ^osed of in the afore-stated terms. Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge