HJH (,OUR I‘ OE CHHA I‘TI§(:ARH A1 BELAQPI RI 1‘ PETH ION No 2135 of2Q0 Kum Santa Bala Dadsena daughter 0i Shwlal Dadsena aged about 23 years occupanon Comraci Teacher Class H Pumary School Salhejhanva Tah. Basna, D1511 Mahasamund‘{C.G.) y k x ‘ v I ‘ SPONDENTS , State of (.hhatmoarh Thmugh Secretary, School Educauon Department D K Bhawan. Ra1pur . Diroctox l’anchdyat & Socxal Welfare Deoamnent , Ra1pur . Ch1ef Executive Oiilcer Janpat Panchayat Bama T ah. Basna, Dist. Mahasamund (CG) . Smt" Suman Verma, wifle of Jaipal Kumar Venna, g r, ’“ah: Basna, Dist? resident of ‘Bha Mahasamund (C.G.) . Ku. Sarita Jan‘gée,‘ dau Passed on 29$ day of Augwt 2008 ( ) ccordmg to leamed counsel anpearm ,iA v the Qalecuon, the pctltloner was appo “ u Shiksha Karmi Grade 11 m Middie Soh Dmnct Mahasamunci on 16 08 2003 fpetmoner Jomed the servwes on 21 08 ( \ I E, VERSUS ' i’ er of S.S.Eangde~ residexit ” ’ of Up Jail Line Colony: Mahas‘amund (CG ent No 4/caveator or the petitioher pursuanm‘ f o ted on the post ot Contrac " - o ‘i r ‘1 perlod of one year T r t3 ' ‘ $ 2 s d , hr1 P K Bhadun 13am} Lawver for the Sta e/respondem NO 1 & hn V K Pandey, Advocaie for the respon H R W 4 f w u t ) , I t / ) he .. x ’AIR 1959 SC 149 2 (1987) Supp. scc 93 made by respondent VO 4 her qelec‘mn Wdb cancelied bv order dated 8 12 2003 passed by the Collector Mahasamund i The pet1t10ner bang aggmved pieferred a rewswn baforc, ihe Director. _, ‘ i’anchayats Sari Ragpu‘i further eubmits that mteum relief was granted r i and the petitioner continued to work wContmct gmksha Karim Gfad i 11 upto 27:04.20G4 when the revision of the petitioner was iejected on: 27.4.2004. The petitioner has preferTedi this writ petiiion on 5.7.200 ' é fresh selection process has taken thereafter I l I , petmoner was r account of the fact that the term ofthe ppointment, even otherwisethe ‘ f period has come to an end. Thus, this Vpe ition has become intitxctuou With regard to non~compliance Of the Collector’ orrier to hold fres h E i seiectmn is concerned Issue remains to be of academic mtereet whic by catena of (iecrsions ‘ passed bv the Hon’ble Supreme rt (See Baskeshar Nam x Commiesioner 0f Income Tax, Delhi DEartzpakzr Made}? Lei Agrawal v. Ragiv Gandhf, Secretary, M’mzstty ’ offnfbmation dé Broadcasting, Govt. i Shn Rajput submits thdt the petitioner 1s avgneveti by the fact that no. Be that as 1t may smee the term of appointment of the one academtc year and the petitloner he? completed one academlc yea t durmg the pendenov of the revrsron b fore the Director, The petttloner has no right to continue or remstatement on the pos the appomtment ofthe petmoner was on contract beets for one academ year onlv The selectxon was held as b d and illegal by the Mahasamund, at thls stave the netltlo er cannot clam any rehef v and Rafa than and cannot be atigudicated upon as well e 4.‘ t m h ' s, “3 ’ Associazion 0f Benga£ am’ oakars3,?Siate afMampar and otkers v. E Ckandam Marzihgr Singh4, Ami! Dag v. State of Bikat’s and Prakash Singk Badal and another v. Stare ofPhgtnjab andothers‘s.) 3 The dicta laid down by the Supreme Cfourt in the above-mentioned cases y have been subsequently‘refexred ané fellowed by this (301111 in the ' ‘ i matter of Tritiya Verg Shaskiya Khmachari Grill Nirman Sahkari t Samiti Maxyadii V" The Chhattisgarh Iénformation Commission 85' Others “ (W.P. (C) No. 4313 of 2008) decidedi (m 11m August, 2008, wherein ’1t ' i has been he1d in categorical'tenns that the question ofiaw on academic interest cannot be adjudicated upon, the same should be left open fer _ § adjudication Whenever the appropriate facts arise. . i Aepiying the abOve stated we}! settled principles of 1aw to the faets (if ' the case on hand,_tliis petition has no merit. The petition isdismisseid accordingly. No order asto Costs. 3 (1%)»2 , soc 161 I (1999),7 SCC 503