IN THE HON'BLE HI6H COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUJ fC.G.) WRITPETITCON {5 ) N0.7^^ OF 2011 PETITCONER: RESPONbENTS ^" Ashish AAalak* S/o. Shri Amroj AAafakt.aged about 40 years, ByCaste-Ishai, occupation - S&rvice, Posted as Peon at 6ovt. High Schoot Chtkhali, Vikash Khand Pithoura, Distt.- AAahasarHund (C.G.) VERSUS t. The StQteofChhQtt-iggarh, Through the Secretary SchooJ Educatfon &epartmeRt b. K. S. ButldKig Ratpur , Distt.- Raipur(C.G.) 2. -^'Dir^ctor. Lok Shtksh<in Dtrect-orcFt-e Raipur, bistt.-Raipur ( C.G.) 3. ' Collector Mahc^amuRd, bistl-.- MQhasamund (C.G.) ^" ^ . •' - . • ' ,. 4. Djstrict Educatton Officer, Mahasamund, Distt.- AAahasamund ( €.&.} WRIT PETITEON UNDER ARTECLE226 Of CONSTETUTEON OF IN&IA. o-^ ..<.- .-\ HiGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR 8B : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PmTINKER DIWAKER PBTITIONBR RESPONDBNTs W.P.fSI.NO. 7343/2011 Ashish Malafei veraus State ofChhattisgarh & Others Shri Surdl Sahu, counsel for fhe petitioner. Shri Chandresh Shrivastava, P.L. for the State. WRIT PETITION UNDBR ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA OKDBR (05.12.2011) Grievance of fhie petitioner in fhe present petition is agaiast tlie order of imposition ofpunishment by fhe Distodct Ediication Officer. Counsel for fhe petitioner subimts tha.t the petitioner has already preferred an appeal before fhe Director, PubUc Instructions/respondent N0.2 on 02,01.2010 but the said appeal has uot been decided till dale. He submits that purpose of flUiig fhis petition would be served tfdircction is issued to fhe respondent No.2 to decide fb.e pendiag appeal offhe petitioner withia some tmiefraine. State counsel has no objection if fhe pending appeal of fhe petitioner is decided ifalready not decided, wifhiin souie timeframe. Accorditigly, the petition is disposed ofwith a direction to fhe respondent No.2 to decide fhe pendiag appeal of fhe petitioner if already not decided in accordaace wifh law as expeditiously as possible preferably withia a period of two iiionths froin the date of receipt of copy offhis order. It would be fhe duty of the petitioner to apprise the respondent N0.2 about fhe passuig offhis order, It is made clear fhat this Court has not expressed any opiiiion on nierits of fhe case and the appeUate aufhority would be at Uberty to decide fh.e appeal sfaictiy in accordaace wifh law. Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge