Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(iv) Accordingly the petitioner made a representation/ application on 20.10.2006, which came to be rejected on 16.01.2007. Against the said rejection, the petitioner again approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No.2391 of 2008. This time also the petitioner was granted liberty to take recourse to the permissible remedy. Since under the Ashram School Code there is no appeal/revision provided against the order passed by the Commissioner, Tribal Development, the petitioner once-again approached the Commissioner Tribal Development Department seeking re-consideration of his request. However, the said request came to be rejected by the impugned order dated 28.01.2011. The only ground on which such rejection is based is that the petitioner was appointed as a temporary employee on a year-to-year basis and that he was not a confirmed employee.

5 WRIT ETITION-1788-2012(J).odt

6. We do not find favour with the argument advanced by the learned Assistant Government Pleader as he has not pointed out remedy, namely any appeal/revision against the order of the Commissioner, Tribal Development, which the petitioner could have availed pursuant to the liberty granted by this Court vide order dated 09.02.2009 to approach the appropriate authority by initiating appropriate proceedings. Since there is no appeal or revision provided under the Ashram School Code, the petitioner took a chance to approach the Commissioner once-again with similar prayer, which came to be rejected vide order impugned dated 28.01.2011.