XI-HC—78 311^1'^ R;^Gb "TOT^TT^T 9i»*ii<=n "ysr ^ii^id^ ^xil^^Ko, f®i<ni^< <n^<ti (i»*iict» '^200 3TI^TT TT?^R> (1?t^«l^) ^wi^R tif^a fSinale Bench; Won'ble Mrl W.P. (s) h PETmONERS RESPONbENTS (Petition U//\ 226 ofl Manoj Ku^ about 35| Masturi, Versus 1. Statel Secre) bevelc Raipur 2. The C| bepar) 3. TheCl 4. The Bilasp^ 5. The Panchc Present: Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Advocate for th Mrs. Smita Ghai, Panel Lawyer for 5.2.2009 Heard. Grievance of the petitioner in the examination conducted for III, however, his name did not candidates though he had obtained enquiry, he learnt that his name as he had not marked b.Ed. Columr cftHt<n<i1i *ii*i<viT ^ fs^l <f^i^i< ifr3ffOT3TT^T Justice Dhirendra Mishra) 10.709/2009 Constitution of India) ^ar Pandey, S/o Shri N.C.Pandey, aged [years, resident of Village Kirari, Post >istrict Bilaspur (CG) of Chhattisgarh, through: the 1-ary, bepartment of Panchayat and Rural tpment, Mantralay at b.K.S. Bhawan, j(CG) irector, Panchayat and Social Welfare 1-ment, Raipur (C6) ^llector, Bilaspur (CG) C^ief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat lir(CG) Chief Executive Officer, Janpad [ydt Masturi, bistrict Bilaspur (CG) the petitioners. State. this petition is that he participated r^cruitment of Shiksho Karmi Grade- find place in the list of selected I'equisite marks for appointment. On i.dp not mentioned in the selected list in his application. Sub^equently nn wa|s '^-> \ 1 %ifF;y"^ ,^ XI-HC—78 OT^T'SFT RTiw iWT3TT^T^FTIW 'S^ST ^i^id^ ^Ti1^^i<o, f®i<ni^< w*iyii WHi^n -^200 ^n^ff Tl?T?r (lici(^<i?) ^wi<(T[ ^(^d -z- his representation, his case for| clarification was sought from the bj the candidates, who are residents their t);Ed. course outside the Statt GrQde-III or not. The t)irector/P(|i vide memo of Annexure P-12 addre4 Zila Panchayat Bilaspur stated recruitment does not prohibit the done their b.Ed. course outside tt considered for appointment. Howe\ appointments have been deferred in| Learned counsel for the pe| direction from the Director, Pancha) been deprived from consideration f^ that he is not pressing this pe1 petitioner may be permitted to respondent No.5 and in turn, resppl the case of the petitioner for appoir On the other hand, learned a case the petitioner files fresh r< grievance before respondent No.5, decided within a period of three we< representations. <sbl<4fd4l'1 'RW^ff ^f 'feT^ Tf^R^R ^i'^^fima^^T appointment was considered and 'ector, Panchayat to the effect that )f State of Chhattisgarh and done may be appointed as Shiksha Karmi ichayat in reply to the above query sed to the Chief Executive Officer, that if the advertisement for 'esidents of Chhattisgarh who have e State, in that case they can be ^r, the cases of the petitioners for anticipation of guidance. ifioner submits that despite clear ^at in this regard the petitioner has appointment. He further submits tion at this stage, however, the |file fresh representation before dent No.5 be directed to consider I'ment within specified period. ^unsel for the State submits that in Ipresentation for rederssal of his Ithe same shall be considered and ^ks from the date of receipt of the + eilmy /'. ^-.^'' ..•• ^. ?'-:^.':?' '^i. XI-HC—78 3^T ^FT f^ilor) "TOT ^i1^1 si»*ilcn M' "s^ ^ww^, ^-^ww, T^^w^ N11CTI »»*lict» '•^200 3TI^T TR?F ( yit^^) ^RHW ^a 3TT^?I -3,. arld In view of the above parties, the instant petition is| petitioners to make fresh repres^ certified copy of this order beforel grievances raised in this petition the respondent No.5 is directed accordance with IQW within a receipt of the representation. Consequently,I.A. No.l, app| disposed of. Certified copy as per rule$. sub|mission of leQrned counsel for the disposed of with liberty to the ^ntation along with this petition and respondent No.5 for redressal of his on such representation being made, t-o consider and decide the same in of three weeks' from the date of peri(|d <t)114id^1'1 'RP^ff'^l^t <f^^i< ^ atRm 3^?T ication for interim relief also stands Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge