v ^ S^! \fi.S 'S BEUfii !hS.£ KfcNC! IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR [C.G.1 WRTT PETITION (S) N0. 3 Lt- S 2 /2010 PETITIONER ^^ ^^^ yV" ^: ^ ^^ ^ ^ -^ <>•/ RESPONDENTS Kumari Dijori Sidar D/o Sri Janinajay Singh Sidar, Aged-about 20 years, R/o village- Kesaipali, post^Chhapora, Distt.- Raigarh [C.G.] VERSUS l.State of Chhatdsgarh Through- Secretary, Panchayat and Rural developraent department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur [C.G.] 2. Professional Examination Board, Raipur, Through- Secretary, Madhyanuk Shiksha mandal Parisar, Pensionbada, Raipur [C.G.] WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPRQPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTIONS C—78 arr^l ^l ft-li'd ^arr 3n^?T »^ d-<^ •^II^K'I^I, ynly'Ko, fsidiyy. \AJ PC^>fvv-3^/10 311^1'q'TSF (•yi^«<<tl) SB_: HonMe Shri Manindra Mohan IShrivastava.A 15-07-2010 Shri Dhaniram Patel, counsel fjir the petitioner. Shri Ajit Sirgh, Panel Lawyei advance copy. Shri Sameer Behar, counsel f<f respondent No.2 on advance copy. l-1eard. Learned counsel for the petiti^ners submits that while offering her candidature for appointment to the t?ost of Shiksha Karmi Grade-111, the petitioner had opted for Pusour BlocK code No. 196 was mentioned in thel sheet (Annexure P-3), the place ofj Akaltara under Code No. 152, which has submitted a representation befoif qit^[a'4ll ^T^?ff ^' ^^ "?f5f^R ^•srfTOsii^r for the State/respondent No.1 on i, District Raigarh and oorresponding application form, but in the result her option has been indicated as ^ contrary to records. The petitioner ^ the respondent No.2 for redressal of his grievanoe only on 11-06-2010. In view of the submission macje above, it would be proper to direot respondent No.2 to consider the pejtitioner's representation and deckJe the same, based on itsown reoords, |>efore counseling is concluded. With the aforesaid direction, th^ petition is finally disposed of. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge