w W / . $Ingie3ench @ IN’‘HE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHA'I'I‘ISGARH AT BILASPUR ' W.P. S Nofgxkw E 12011 / 1] Vinod Kumari Pegad, S/o’ "Sukman Ram aged about 29 years R/o Vlllage Farsaguda, Ward No 11 Post Bhanpurl Bastar Dlstr1ct Bastar (C G 2] Bhola Slngh, S/o. VIJendra Slngh, aged about 26 years, R/o. Ambedkar Ward, Sai Mandir Road, Behind Shiva Temple, Bastar, District Bastar (C.G.) VERSUS PETITIONERS RESPONDENTS 1]/ State of Chhattisgarh, through: Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, D.K,S. Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur >(C.G.) 2] /Colle'ctor. (Tribal Welfare), Bastar, District Bastar (C.G.) 3]/ Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 4]/ Commissioner, Tribal Welfare, Bastar division, Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C.G.) i" 5] Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare, Collectorate Branch, Jagdalur, District Bastar (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Y § ) p 3am 3W W wecsyywgi 200 WWW mm (Wu) WWW mWW§fsQ§WR *mm [SB : Hon’ble Shri Manindxla Mohain Shrivastava", J.i ‘ 23.6.2011 Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, ca5unse1 for the petitioners. copy. Ms‘ Sunita Jain, Pan 31 Lawyer fonthe State, on advance Heard on admission. The grievance of the ‘ titioners, as ventilated through this petition; is that even thou the petitioners have been placed at the top of the waiting list of eir respective category, they are not being considered for appoin ent even though persons from the merit list, who were app inted, have not joined and have expressed that they are not iiling to accept the appointment. In support of his c ntention, learned counsel for the petitioners referred to the or er dated 16. 1 1.2010 (Annexure P~1), by which Md. Abdulla was ppointed in High School, Kopra and _ Pradeep Kumar Rajput W s appointed in Higher Secondary School, Gamhari. The info ation obtained by the petitioners under Right to Information, shows that Md. Abdulla 8s Pradeep Kumar Rajput have not join y Certificate (Annexure -5) shows that one Ramesh‘Kumar Thakur, Who was also app mted v1de order dated 16 ll 2010 tter ’ e XI—HC 78 I Wm 11ft ‘ zoo mm (Wu) mmfawia: wmm WWW mWM WmR ’ $W3néw - 2’7 Praveen (Annexure P—6), stating t1 appointment may be canoe] ‘péiifidxié1¥$? “made represemtation t‘o the Collector, Divisional Commxssmner and also t - consideration of their name has been taken. first order of appointment dated L) was issued by the Collector/ No. 2 / Collector (Tribal hereby directed to consider the subject to availability of vacancy, tment be considered on the basis of list (Waiting list). The representation case, the petitioners are entitled for rs shall be issued within a period of lat he is not willing“ to join and led. It is further submitted that the 7 Considering that 'the 16.11.2010 (Annexure P— respondent No.2, Development): Bastar is petitioners’ representation petitioners’ name for appoi their placement in the selec shall be considered and, in appointment, necessary 0rd 2 months from the date of o- the Assistant Commissioner for is for appointment, but, no decision respondent gly finally disposed of. The petition is accordi ipt of copy of this order. r d