Anil Brahmane And Another vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors. 14 ... on 9 January, 2020

[Cites 0, Cited by 4]

Chattisgarh High Court

Anil Brahmane And Another vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors. 14 ... on 9 January, 2020

Bench: Prashant Kumar Mishra

                                                                     NAFR

            HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                          WPS No.850 of 2008

     1. Anil Brahmane, S/o Shri Dashrath Brahmane, aged about 43
        years, Occupation - Head Master, Govt. Middle School,
        Singhwahi, District Durg (C.G.)

     2. Shanker Singh Rathore, S/o Shri Bhagwan Singh Rathore, aged
        about 45 years, Occupation - Head Master, Govt. Middle School,
        Patheratola, District Durg (C.G.)

                                                           ---- Petitioners

                                 Versus

     1. State Of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Department of General
        Administration, Mantralaya, D. K. S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.)

     2. Secretary, Department of Scheduled Caste, Schedule Tribe and
        Other Backward Classes Welfare, Mantralaya, D. K.S. Bhawan,
        Raipur (C.G.)

     3. Commissioner, Department of Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe
        and Other Backward Classes Welfare, Raipur (C.G.)

                                                          ---- Respondents

For Petitioners                    None
For Respondent-State               Shri K. K. Singh, GA

Hon'ble Justice Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 09/01/2020

1. No one appears for the petitioner.

2. Record perused and the learned State counsel is heard.

3. Petitioners are working as Head Master in the schools under the Department of Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and Other Backward Classes. They are seeking direction to the respondent State to fix promotional quota of the head masters, middle schools along with the lecturers, higher secondary schools for promotional post of Principal, higher secondary schools in the ratio of 40% and 60% in the Tribal Welfare Department.

4. The relief prayed for is in the nature of seeking direction to the legislature to frame rules in a particular manner which is not permissible under writ jurisdiction. It is settled law that Writ Court cannot direct the legislature to enact a particular rule. No direction can be issued in this regard by the Writ Court. If the petitioners so desire, they may file representation before the concerned department.

5. The writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/-

Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge Nirala

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Chattisgarh High Court