← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/712/2018disposed off

Dileshwar Dadsena v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2018-01-19Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 712 of 2018 Dileshwar Dadsena S/o Motilal Dadsena, Aged About 41 Years, Presently Posted And Working As Sankul Saikhik Samanwya (Circle Academic Coordinator) (CAC), Karnaud, Block Bamnidih, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Post Office And Police Station Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Rajeev Gandhi Shiksha Mission, Through Mission Director, Chhattisgarh, Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Collector, Janjgir Champa, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.

4. Collector - Cum - District Mission Director, Rajeev Gandhi Shiksha Mission, Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.

5. District Educaton Officer, Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.

6. Rama Shankar Pandey Upper Division Teacher, Middle School, Karnaud, Block Bamnidih, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. B. D. Guru, Advocate.

For Respondents/State :

Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 19/01/18 1.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the additional charge of Circle Academic Coordinator (CAC) has been taken over from the petitioner and is given to respondent No. 6, being aggrieved against which this writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner.

2.

Be that as it may, the petitioner is at liberty to make a representation before respondents No. 3 and 4 for redressal of his grievance within two weeks from today and, in turn, the respondent authorities shall consider and decide the petitioner's representation expeditiously preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of representation. The petitioner would also be at liberty to make an additional representation, if any. 3.

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s).

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Priyanka