r HON'BLE S.B. INJJjJEjyON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR 3\^: WRIT PETITION (S} No. / 2011 PETITIONER: t'w/ ^j^ 1'^1 ^' R^P0NDENTS: ^^/ 'y 2. Ku. Sunanda Dutta, D/o Shri S. K. Dutta, Aged about 26 Years, R/o Maharani Ward, Behind F.C.I. Godown, Kumharpara, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, C.G. VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary,Department of Panchayat & Rural Development, D.K.S. Building , Ministry, Raipur, C.G Chief Executive Officer, District Panchayat, District Bastar, C.G. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA The petitioner named above begs to submit as under:- ^n^r ^RT f<^ich 'cT^T ^^ ^H\^ ^ fo '5^r ^IOKI^, ^tn-H1!^', fstdiy^ . NIN^^i*-^-£-crj-x"^/^-^200 ^T^T TT?^ (^qf^q^) I1RTRR ^rft^T 37T^?r SB : FEIon'bIe Shri Maniadra Mohan Shrivastava, J.i 22.6.2011 Shri Alok Dewangan, coi Shri Y.S. Thakur, Dy. advance copy. Heard on admission. This petition has beenj tnaction on the part of res] petitioner's representation norj Case of the petitioner is post of Shikshakarmi Grade| Bastar, in. which, fhe petitiou^ process of selection, merit lisl the petitioner on 3.2.2011 petitioner has beeu selected| appear on 18.2,2011 for certificates. The petitioner apj fhe original certtficates an<j informed that the process ofl orders wiU. be issued, no orde^ been assigned. Now tiie of selection to the post of Shi^ Learned counsel for fhd was selected after a due proj: ^Prf^Pft^T 'RTWff ^* 'fe1^ <f^-^!< ^3^[H37?^T respo|adent insel for the petitioner. Advocate General for fhe State, ou filed by the petitioner aggrieved by londeut No.2 in neither consideriug providing appointDient. :hat fhe process for recruitm.ent to fhe -II was initiated by Jila Panchayat, T participated and atter completion of was prepared. A letter was issued to (Annexure P-1), informing that the and the petitioner was reqiiired to scrutiny of original testimouials, leared before the authority along witli after verffication, though it was appoiutment would be iDitiated and has been issued nor any reasou has No.2 has iaitiated fresh process shakarmi Grade-II. petitioner subm-its fhat fhe petitioner ;ess of selection and was placed in the ...,.jr^""": .Hi?» g ' ^'y ~w^ XI-HC—78. ^-ST ^ww^^ w^\w{<o, f®ldl^!j,< *ii*i^ir ^t<ira» "^200 3TT^T 7T^F (liGlf^<^) 3i7^T^ f^<ljcb '?T8TT W^T »)*lich .-•1^ '^rrw^ftn 37T^r tw Praveea. merit list, therefore, she is ent^fled to appomtm.ent. On fhe other hand, learr mere selection does not confei submits that fhe petitioner's authority for decision of repre^ the provision of Chhattisga^h Panchayat Shikshakanni (Bharti Tafha Seva Ki Sharten) Rules, Taking into considerati< counsel for fhe petitioner, I to the Chief Executive Offi< required to be considered petitioner as to the reas< No.2 to consider fhe represe petitioner on 13th April, 2^ would be at Uberty to take su<| (Bharti Tatha Seva Ki Sharten§ Wifh the aforesaid cf disposed of. CM^f<n<flvt 'HFi^ff ^f 'fet^ <P»i^« '^3ffTO3T^T .ed counsel for the State submits tliat any right to apponitment. He furfher kemedy is to approach the concerned eutation or to prefer an appeal under 2007. >n the submission made by learned am not iaclined to issue notice to responden^ because mere s^lection does not confer any right to appotatnient. However, the pejtitiouer having made a represeutation ;er of Jila Panchayat, flie same is ind decided, communicatiiig to the ns for non-issuance of order of appoiatnient. It would/ ther^fore, be proper to direct respondent itation which has been made by the ^ 11 aud take a decision on such representation. In case, the p^titioner is aggrieved by the ord.er, she h remedy, iacluding remedy of appeal avaUable to her under fhe Clhhattisgarh Pauchayat Shikshakarmi Rules, 2007. servations, the petition is finaUy Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge