Homanlal Hirwani v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No.7325 of 2017

1. Homanlal Hirwani S/o Shri Guhariram Hirwani, Aged About 48 Years Occupation Shiksha Karmi, Grade - I I (Physical Education Teacher) At Government High School Kotagoan Block And Tahsil Dondi, District Balod Chhattisgarh.

2. Nikhar Santoshwar S/o Shri J.J. Santoshwar, Aged About 43 Years Occupation Shiksha Karmi Grade - I I (Physical Education Teacher) At Government High School Bhainsbod, Block And Tahsil Dondi District Balod Chhattisgarh.

3. Shivram Vaidya S/o Shri Goverdhan Singh, Aged About 49 Years Occupation Shiksha Karmi Grade - I I (Physical Education Teacher) At Government High School Khallari, Block And Tahsil Dondi, District Balod Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary Panchayat And Rural Development Department Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Zila Panchayat, Balod Through Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Balod, District Balod Chhattisgarh. --- Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. J.N. Nande, Advocate For State : Mr. Dilman Rati Minj, Dy.G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 04/01/2018 (1) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners have made representation before respondent authorities for promotion on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-II, which has not been considered and decided since 30.08.2017 and, therefore,

direction may be issued to the respondent authorities to decide the same expeditiously.

(2) Prayer appears to be fair and reasonable.

(3) Be that as it may, respondent No.2 is directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioners strictly in accordance with law expeditiously from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. (4) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case and respondent No.2 would be at liberty to consider and decide the representation of the petitioners in accordance with law.

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

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge L/-