High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/5489/2020disposed off

Shyam Lal Sai v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2021-01-22Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 5489 of 2020

1. Shyam Lal Sai S/o Shri Mahendra Sai Aged About 38 Years R/o Village- Dhurasad, Post- Khutagaon, Tehsil- Farsabahar, P.S. Farsabahar, District- Jashpur, Chhattisgarh

2. Nand Kumar Ram S/o Shri Nan Ram Aged About 37 Years R/o VillageSinghibhar, Post Singhibhar Tehsil- Farsabahar, P.S.- Tapkra, DistrictJashpur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Mission Director Chhattisgarh State Project Office, Rajeev Gandhi Shikhsa Mission, Board Office Campus, Pension Bada, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Collector Cum District Mission Director Rajeev Gandhi Shiksha Mission, Jashpur, District- Jashpur

4. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Jashpur, District- Jashpur, Chhattisgarh

5. Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat, Farsabahar DistrictJashpur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Chitendra Singh, Advocate For State :

Mr. Amit Buxy, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 22.01.2021

1. Counsel for the petitioners at the outset submits that they restrict their claim to the extent that their representation which they have made seeking employment with the respondents, is pending consideration and that the same may be decided at the earliest in accordance with

law.

2. The limited relief is not opposed by the State counsel.

3. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of directing the respondents to consider the representation which the petitioners have made and which is pending before the respondent No. 4 at the earliest preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

4. It is made clear that the order would have its effect only in the event of the earlier representation not being decided till now. In addition, the petitioner would also be at liberty to make a fresh representation, if they so want.

5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge Jyotijha