f.\ 0^: . 1 -""' IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH WMT PETITION N0. •36) /2005 PETITIONER <^ Versus Ashwini Kumar Sharma, S/o. Shri Kapil Prasad Sharma, aged about 39 years, R/o. Village - Kunda, Block & Tah. Pandariya, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.). RESPONDENTS ^e^'f- ^" ^" ^ »••'..^ ^^.^ '^"t) „-' ^-n.so-co^ ^•"L. ^s.^^ 1) State of Chhattisgarh, ^' Through Secretaiy, School Education Department, Mantralaya, D.K.S.Bhawan, G.E.Road, Raipur (C.G.). 2) Director of Public Instructions, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Directorate of Public Instructions, (DPI Office) Pension Bada, Raipur (C.G.) ^r^'Vt^u-y^^-"' ^_._. •'""""'^T^^^^'7 / 3) Deputy Director of Public Instruction, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Education Department, Education District Bilaspur, (C.G.). WMT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. ^ XI-HC-22 3^ r<ii*<i<rt*), (STfl^<i<o, fc)diy^< t\ 3T1^?T q^^l ^j+K'll $b^|ch .^.^u ^••*• ••••4«»« ^-r^ * * • • ^ 200^- 3T^T^T f^Tf^^n^T N)'^f?< 5h^l<=h^7^c[ ^n^T^C<TTW:^f?cT <^i^fci^i^ w^ff ^*te^i <r^^i< ^3Tf^T3TI^T 19^1-2005 Mr. Alok Nigam, counsei Mr. Akhil Agrawal, Panel Heard both the counsel. The case of the petitioi Department of the erstwhile appointment of ad-hoc Schools. In that tost the petiti appointed for a period of S ^fQi However, the services| vacancy, which arose on ac^ services, was filled by the petitiooer is regularly making for appointment on the post of in tho yoar 1997 the erstwhiie ^ teachers in place of Shiksha by the State of Chhattisgarh. Learned counsel for the| allowed to make a grievances and respondent No| which Having heard learned facts and drcumstances of tht detailed representation to respc| all his grievances, and in tum| representetion made by the thrse months from the date of for the petitioner. ^.awyef for the State. ii|»er is that in the year 1981 the Education St^te of Madhya Pradesh conducted a test for Assisl^nt Teachers in the Government Prsmary petitjoner was se|,©ct©dand acqordingiy, he was ^(^\ ^ 1^ fff^r>^^ ^t^ ^PL^ months on a^^d-J^te^^^^^Q^—p^f of the petitioner were discontinued and the [sount of discontinuation of the petitioner's 3|tate of Madhya Pradesh. Thereafter, the ^epresentatjons for considering the petitioner 'eacher. Further case of the petitioner is that ^tate of M.P. took a decision to appoint ad-hoc K|armi. but the same is not being implemented represer|tation learned counsel for the Sfate of Chhattisgarh cdunsel Ipetitioner submits that the petitioner may be to respondent No.2 raising atl his |2 be directed to dedde his representetion, to has no objection. for the parties and having regard to the case, the petitioner is aJlowed to make a ndent No.2 within ten days from today raising respondent No.2 is directed to consider the and decide the same within a period of receipt ofthe representation in an objective pelptioner the XI-HC-22 ^^ ^iWW^, t$Tf1<1l|(S, fc|dl^^< 3n^?T ^ M5JCh ^IHC(TT$b^|cb^...W.^.L^^J ,..'r.".<..-»...:.^..,.7-^ ^QQ^ f^^ W^T^)T RFTT^^TI^T $bHich^f?cf Soma (nanner after considering the grieva^^^s of the petitioner, in accordance with |aw. With the djrectionaforesajd, th|e Consequentiy, t.A.Nos.2848/2p05 bf. Parties are w^T^Trw^fgcf - 2-H • entitled for certifiecj copy of this order ^x^-^L )VO; ^tA f^UU^-' ^~J& CM^T^i41Ti ^i^^T^:tel^t<Ri^i< ^>3Tf^T3TT^T petition stands disposed of. and 2849/2005 also stand disposed Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge t^ ^A'^^ IS-i^ ^4^ ^Vt^Ai^^ ^CA^-^ lAjLJU^-K3^ ~^-<^^ —Sd/- L.C.BHADOO Judge