9% w% IN THE HON’BLE l-llGH COURT OF CHHATFISGARH AT BILASPUR S W WRIT PETITION No. /201o s B PETITIONERS /’1. Mandhar, S/o Shri.Chaitu aged about—46 years. Peon . Wo-Vimal Vidva Ashram Hr. Sec. School, Mariguda, Chiurgaon, Bakawand (Via) Bastar-District(CG) / 3. Sondhul‘. S/o Shri.(‘hai1u aged about-47 vearsa Peon T R/o—Vimal Vidya Ashram Hr. Sec. School, Mariguda, Chiurgaon, Bakawand (Via) Bastar-District(CG) Bastar—District(CG) VERSUS l. The State ot‘Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Schedule Caste. Schedule Tribe and Backward ClassWelfareDepartment, D.K.S.Bhawan.Mantralaya, District- Raipur (C G) Twv/i ' 2. 'l‘heCon'nnlssioner Tribal Welfare Department, Schedule Caste. Schedule Tribe Development. District— Raipur (C G) he Assistant Commissioner. Tribal Welfare Department .lagdalpur. District-Bastar (C G) /4i The Secretary, Vimal Vidya Ashram High School. Mariguda. Chirgaon Post, Bakawand (Via) Bastar District, Chhattisgarh b). T WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 FOR THE ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI MANDAMUS ETC AND FOR THE APPROPRIATE ORDER/ORDERS~ DIRECTION/ DIRECTIONS HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO.7615 OF 2010 PETITIONERS Mandhar & Another Versus The State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present :- Shri Azad Siddique, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri N.N. Roy, Panel Lawyerforthe State. RESPONDENTS ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on this 3rd day of January, 201 1) xv Grievance of the petitioners is that they are working in the 100% Government aided school, but have not been granted the full benefit of 5‘“ pay scale. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the case of the petitioners is squarely covered with the case decided by this Court on 9-2—2007 in W.P.No.698 of 2006 and at this stage the petitioners may be permitted to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file proper representation before the respondent authorities. Learned further submits that a direction may be issued to the respondent authorities for deciding the representation of the petitioners expeditiously. Learned counsel appearing for the State has no objection iFthe petitioners make any such representation and the same is being decided in accordance with law. Accordingly the petitioner is permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty as aforesaid. ln the eventuality of making any such representation by the pé’titioiter’Within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this the same would be deiced by the competent authority within a further period of two months. lt is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and the authority concerned would be at liberty to decide the representation in accordance with law. ’ ‘\ Satish K.Agnihom ., ,\ Sdl i Judge i Gowri I.