C^C^'^yT^^- IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTES6ARH AT BILASPUR WRITPETCTION fS) NO...'f.<<3J/2010 PETTTIONERS [f -vO ..-:'W\y A^/^Q/ /^•^<^ ^/w -^"./•^ov' ..-yr ,<^.. /i ffS^° .*. \y ^y ^/^ '^^- '.^ ii' RESPONDENTS 1. 2. Numesh Kumar Kanwar, Son of late Khamhan Singh Kanwar, aged about 21 years, at present working as a Shiksha Karmi, 6rade-III, Govt. Primary School, Loharshi, Janpad Panchayat Chhura, District Raipur (C.6.), Lokesh Kumar Pandey Son of late Ghanshyam Prasad Pandey, aged about 33 years, at present working as a Shiksha Karmi, Grade-III, Govt. Primary School, Kanshipar, Jejara, Janpad Panchayat Fingeshwar, Oistrict Raipur (C.6.), VERSUS The State of Chhattisgarh, Through -the Principal Secretary, Department of General Administration, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.6.) The Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, b.K.S. Bhawan,Raipur (C.6.). Ki » RS:m l^i^' I'lll.if'llli" u ^, District Education Officer, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 4. The Collector, Raipur, District Raipur ^ (C.6.) ,- 5. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Chhura, District Raipur (C.G.), 6. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Fingeshwar, District Raipur (C.G.), WRITPETCTION UN&ER ARTECLE 226 OF THE COUNSTCTUTEON OF INDIA. :i:iB.^ Bsi BH ^ w o ^ XI-HC—78 s:n^iwfipfw •Bqisn^cgfln; ~5^ -^wiv\^, yflly'Ko, fayliy^ La:f.U./^.Ao^: HWW tb*1tch "'"'""""""""""""•""""Y--^ 200 3(1^1 'WK ('yfg5I^E[) wnw^iftgsn^i ^>l<lf<?T4l*l iTTO^ff ^ff^t <fo|<^R ^aiRnai^H SB: Hon'ble Shri Maaindia^tohaa^hrivastavaLJ^ 18.8.2010 copy. Mr. R. S.Patel, counse1 Mrs. Sangeeta Mishra, Heard on admission. The petitioners have fil are ward of Assistant Teacti appointment and they have for the petitioners. Panel Lawyer for the State, on advance ;d this petition on the ground that they ers/Upper Division Teachers, who died while in service. They mo|7ed an application for compassionate been given appointinent on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade III. TJhe petitioners submitted that they are entitled to be appointed as Asjsistant Teachers according to the policy. Learned State counsd petitioners may be given submitted fhat for the present, the an opportunity of filing the detailed representation before the corjipetent respondent authority, which may be considered on its own me4ts, in accordance with law. Having considered anc| without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, in the op^nion of this Court, ends of justice will be served, if a direction is giv^n to the petitioners to make a detailed representation raising th^ir grievances before the competent respondent authority along •< within sbs weeks frora today| |rith a copy of the petition and this order, , and on such representation being filed, the competent respondent aijithority shall decide the same on its own XI-HC—78 ^nt •*ii<<i<n'4, ®tTI'M;i<o,faoiyy sn^i ^i l^'ii<i> ^Tsff 3rfT^?T ^h'tffqi Praveen WtlCtT (hMlch W^ 200 sn^i'r^? (yt^'^) TOIIWdfTO •BI^'I z. merits, in accordance with law, period of four nionths from the any grievance still remains, available under the law. |as early as possible,preferably within a date of receipt of the representation. If |he petitioners may avail the remedy With the aforesaid observ^tion, this petition stands disposed off. Certifiedcopy as per rule =i>i«i(CT«fl-iTipraf 4fvS <.r<<^i< ^-aiRlH SIT^I ^^^w