Shyam Lal Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 986 of 2020 Shyam Lal Sahu, S/o. Late Shri Hariram Sahu, Aged About 49 Years, Presently Posted As Block Resource Person (B.R.P.) At Block Resource Centre, Pathalgaon, District Jashpur, R/o. Quarter No. 01 Shiv Furniture Colony, Ward No. 11, Bilaitanger, Nagar Panchayat Pathalgaon, Police Station & Post Pathalgaon, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Its Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Mission Director, Rajiv Gandhi Shiksha Mission, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Collector Cum District Mission Officer, Rajiv Gandhi Shiksha Mission, Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.

4. District Education Officer, Jashpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.

5. Block Education Officer, Pathalgaon, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Ghanshyam Kashyap, Advocate For State-Respondents :

Mr. Priyank Rathi, Panel Lawyer No.1, 3, 4 & 5.

For Respondent No.2 :

Mr. A.S.Kachhawaha, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 17.02.2020

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as Block Resource Centre Coordinator (BRCC) at Block Duldula, District Raigarh (now Jashpur) vide order dated 24.09.1996 and then he was transferred to different places. He submits that the Department of School Education has issued the instructions to the Collector cum Mission Director, Rajiv Gandhi Shiksha Mission that in

every block there should be only one post for Block Development Person and in such Block, regular teacher should not be appointed as Block Resource Person; however, ignoring such direction of the State by Annexuer P-7 dated 23.11.2019 one Shailendra Kumar Singh has been appointed as Block Resource Person. He further submits therefore the petitioner has filed a representation to the Collector, District Jashpur on 28.11.2019 (Annexure P-8) which may be directed to decide.

2. Considering the submission made, without any observation on merit, since the petitioner has prayed to decide the representation, which is moved before the Collector on 28.11.2019, the Collector is directed to decide the representation of the petitioner within a further period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

3. With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge ashok