^ ^ ^$?.3r"F^S4 ^^i^::' .<^^d»c*'a'o< r^ ^r^~) IN THE HON»BLEHIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P. (S) No. 5^3.0^ /2009 PETITIONER ^l Ku. Dipika Lohani, D/o. Shri V.R.Lohani, aged about 25 years, R/o. Chandaniapara, Janjgir, Tahsil Janjgir, District Janjgir-Charapa (C.G.) V&vs^s RESPONDENTS :1) State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Panchayat and Social Welfare Department, DKS Bhavan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) :2) Controller, C.G. Professional Examination Board, Raipur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE ^26 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AF^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 5307 of2009 Petitioner Kzi, Dipika Lohaiii Versus Respondents State of ChliattisgarJi & aiiother WRIT PETITON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. (SB: Honlole Shri Satish K. Agnihotri J.) s:Shri Rajesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate for fhe petitiouer. Shri A, V. Shridhar, Paiiel Lawyer for fhe respondeat No. l, Shri Paiikaj Aganyal, Advocate for the rcspoadent No.2, O RD B R (Orall (Passed on fhis 18th day of November, 2009) Heard, By fiiis petition, the petitioner seeks a writ in tlie natere of iiiaadaoius, directmg the respondente to consider the place of appoiatraent of the petitiouer as per the 0,M,R. (Optical Mark Readeri para 23,4 (Annexure P/l)< The petitioxier farfher seeks a direction to the respoxidents to consider her representation (Annexure P/4), in accordance wifh law, Learned counsel appearing for fhe petitibner sutomits fh.at tlie petitioner submitted an appUcation for appearing in the Chhattisgarh State Shiksha Karmi Selection Exammation, 2008 for the post ofShiksha Karmi Grade-III, As per the mstructions (OMi^) the petitioner fiUed m column No, 23,4 as Code No, 208 ie, Jaapad Paiichayat, Kasdol, Distiict Raipur, On declaratioii of resiilt fhe place of appoiotiaent of fhe petitiosier was shcwii as Daoitewada, Thereafter, the petitioner made representations on 6.11,2008 and 5.5.2009 but ofno avail. Learaed counsel appeariug for the petitioner submits tliat ia fhe application form (Annexare P/1) m tlie columii 23.3 ~ City for Exammation, the petitioner fiUed up the Code No. 28 (Dantovada) aad hi coluinn 23.4- Forwhich Jaiipad Paiichayat tlie appMcatioii is made, the petitioner filled up the Code No. 208 (Jaiipad 6. Pao.chayat Kasdol, Distiict Raipur). Therefore, the selection ofthe petitigner ought to have been made for the Jaiipad Panchayat - Kasdol, isistead ofJaapad Panchayat- Dantewada, Clause 23,3 and 23.4 of the OMR instractioixs are relevant and quoted below : (< ^qcf?T^c?)§ cSTif^ 23-3 ^ ^Ntw ¥re1?f <^t ^t ^y ^rp^ W2N 13<T^ c^t^ l^ f Srrqr f^TCT ^ftfflT ^T?<? ^' ^W i% ^l^l^ltl ?Nr 'a^ t '3^ WVS ^f^T ^t®^t f^ ^ ^TcRT <f t^Rt' IETSW 'ff'ife^ ^lt^ ^ ^rar ^' j d?f^4?| TT. 23.4 ^ Wq ^TO ^WR qXRRT t^ wt^rr ^? ^f t BW^T qj^g «l1^T^t ! <5f-TlR iNpERT ^ c|?N PlMI^'HN t i ^ Wq ^R <*>'fe<4?l ^>t •T^¥ »R^t <ft «mi f^ro ^re^ ^ tNtm ^ '?t t. q? ^re^ f^ro ^<iu< 4^!<ici ^ w':tpf?r 3TKTT t <ff<ift i5T-Tq^ iNPRT t^ 3mq?T 31}^^ m^q f^qr vll^^ti | " Per contra, leamed counsel appeariag for the respoiideiit No.2 submite fhat sio.ee ihe petitioner had chosea 1tie ctty for exaoimation as Daiite\vada by xnentioxiing Code No, 04 m. Clause 22.2 and Code No. 28 ta CIause 23.1, she shoidd have written the Code No, 125 m Clause 23.4 which rclates to fhe option asto for which Jaapad Paachayat the appMcation is filled up, Shri Agrawal submits fhat fhe place mentioned at clause 22.2 ft>r tl Shaksha Karmi Grade II, wiU be treated as application for appomtment in fhe same distdct. But m clause 23, there is a separate coluiaui where the petitioner has a chofce to spectfy in the applfcation Janpad Panchayat for which fhe applicant wishes to make application, Thus, fhe petitioner is not entitled for any relief In reply, learaed counsel appearmg for the petitioner contends fhat fhe caiididates were given option to fill up the Code No, of fhe cily from where they wish to appear m the exammation, likewise, they were given option to fiU up fhe Code No, offhe Jaapad Panchayat for whlch fheir application should be treated after selection, Clause 22 of the OMR application provides fhat if a caiididate is applyiag for selection on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade II^ he should iadicate.fhe cily/distdct offhe exammation m clause 22,2, In the said coluinn, fhe petitioner has iadicated 04 Le. Daatewada. 9, Inclause 23, ^was.pix^ided that fhe appiicant who is ^pplying ft)r Shiksha Karmi Grade III, iie should fiB up. fhe cohioin ie, iiiclause 23.3, examiiiiation city, fhereio., fhe petitiox^r has .fiUed up the code 28 i,e, Daiitewada. In cMuse 23.4, fhe petitioner sliould iadicate tlie code of Janpad Paiichayat for which .he & niakiag fhe appUcation, The petitiouer has meritiDned208. Code 208 staads for Kasdol io. distdct. Raipur. In fhe note at flie bottom of the iiis'fcructioiis, it waa stated fhat if flie applicaiit is miakiiig ao. application for more fhan. one grade, he shoiiM specify: oiity. one examiaatioii ceiitre, In flie preseat case, bavio.g regard to flie. prescriptfon io. claase 22 whe^in it is stated fhat Ae applteation of a camlMate shall be treated: as .fhe applicatibn for tlie sanie city whereiri he "has chosen ceiitre of exam.iiiatioia, tlie appUcatioa of •the petitioner for selection m Shiksha Karmi Grade II would be Dairtewada, In case of Shiksha • Karmi Grade III, clause 23,4 ·specifi.es the code of Janpad Paiictiayat for ^wliich the petitioner lias -made application, Iii tlie case on hand,, tlie petitioner has given 208 code ie, Jaiipad Paiichayat, Kasdol, Dlstrict Raipiir, .111 •flie application foxiii, Thiis, tlie respondent aufhorities are directed to consider ffaie ca.se ofthe petitfoner for appomtrxxent ia case of SMksha Kanm Grade II for distodct Dantewada aiid in. case ofShiksha Karmi Gra^.e III, for Jaapad Pao.chayat, Kasdol, District Ralpur, tf the petitioner is found selected cn meiit for fhe area as stated above, a proper order niay be passed on consideration. The petition is aUowed to fhe above extent No oixler asto costs, Thabxr/Amit Sd/- Satish K.Agnihotri Judge