Snigdha Gwal W/o Manish G. Yadav vs State of Chhattisgarh & Ors

Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J

By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought following reliefs:

10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this petition and the respondents may kindly be directed looking to the vacant post of Zoology lecturer at Balco Korba as well as the Kasturba Gandhi, Katghora, and looking to the fact that the study of students of zoology subject the petitioner may be permitted to continue in any one school out of the aforementioned 2 schools, till the decision of the representation of the petitioner, in the interest of justice.

10.2 That, any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioner in the interest of justice along with cost of the petition.

Mr. Nikhil Wadhwani, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that earlier petitioner has filed the writ petition before this Court in which the petitioner was directed to file directed to be decided by the respondent-authorities. He would also submit that though two orders have been passed, but the said two orders have been passed in respect of the schools where no vacant post is available under the Rationalization Policy. He would further submit that the petitioner has again filed a representation while stating that the earlier two orders which has been passed for the petitioner in respect of the schools where no vacant post is available and, as such, the petitioner could not be accommodated under the Rationalization Policy. Moreover, the petitioner has filed the representation before the authorities concerned stating that where one post is still available in Government Boys Higher Secondary School Balco, Korba and Kasturba Gandhi Residential School, Katghora in which the petitioner can be accommodated under the Rationalization Policy, therefore, respondent- authorities may be directed to consider and decide the petitioner's representation considering the two options given by the petitioner herein.

Mr. Avinash Singh, learned State counsel, is having no objection, if the direction is issued to the respondent authorities to consider the petitioner's representation and fact that the petitioner has given option of two schools where the post is available.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their submissions made here in above.

Admittedly, the respondent-authorities are required to post the petitioner in accordance with law where post is available under the scheme of Rationalization Policy. Since the petitioner is required to be posted in the school where the post is vacant under the Rationalization Policy and for the same the petitioner has given two options, the respondent authorities are directed to consider and decide the petitioner's representation within further 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order considering the options given by the petitioner herein. However, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion of the case.

With the aforesaid observation/direction the instant writ petition stands disposed off.