Jitendra Kumar Nishad v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 694 of 2021

1. Jitendra Kumar Nishad S/o Anandram Aged About 30 Years R/o Gram - Bhothali, Post- Shankara, District- Balod, Chhattisgarh., District : Balod, Chhattisgarh

2. Ramakant S/o Shivlal Aged About 32 Years R/o Shankara, PostKarahibhadar, Sanjaribalod, District- Balod, Chhattisgarh., District : Balod, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Director Directorate Of Public Instructions, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Collector Dantewada District- Dantewada, Chhattisgarh., District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh

4. District Education Officer Dantewada District- Dantewada, Chhattisgarh., District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioners : Shri Anadi Sharma, Advocate. For State : Shri Rahul Jha, G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 18.02.2021

1. The present is a writ petition whereby the petitioners are claiming for an appropriate direction to the respondents for considering their claim for appointment as Atithi Shikshak in terms of the order of the State Government dated 02.08.2019 and 24.06.2019.

2. The contention of the petitioner is that all the petitioners herein have worked as Vidya Mitaans during the period from 2016 till 2019. However, thereafter their services have been discontinued. According to the petitioners, the petitioners herein earlier had filed a writ petition i.e. WP(S) 3431/2020, which got disposed off on 28.08.2020 whereby this Court taking into consideration clause-1 of the said circular of the State Government dated 02.08.2019 and directed the authorities to consider and decide the claim of the petitioners in-terms of the circulars of the State Government.

3. According to the petitioners, thereafter, there has been no further development taken till date in spite of there being this order of this Court and they have therefore come to this Court for a fresh direction to the respondents.

4. Considering the fact that this Court had in the past passed a similar order in a series of writ petitions of identical nature, this Court at this juncture is inclined to pass an order to the extent that the petitioners' case be considered by the respondents No. 2 & 4 for being appointed as Atithi Shikshak in terms of any advertisement or recruitment drive which the respondents have initiated in District Dantewada and subject to the petitioners fulfilling the minimum eligibility criteria including educational qualification, the case of the petitioners be consider in-terms of the policy of the State Government itself wherein they have mentioned that Vidya Mitaan would be given priority.

5. Let a decision be taken by the respondents No. 2 & 4 in-respect-of the petitioners at the earliest preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this Order.

6. It is made clear that the petitioner in-addition-to their claim that they have made, would also be at liberty to file a fresh representation to the respondents No. 2 & 4 and who may consider the claim of the petitioners for any recruitment to be made for the next academic session unless the circular stands modified or amended.

7. The present writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit