Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 11]

Chattisgarh High Court

Pankaj Kumar Dubey vs State Of Chhattisgarh 9 Wps/9482/2019 ... on 20 November, 2019

                                            1

                                                                                 NAFR

                  HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                WPS No. 9488 of 2019

   • Pankaj Kumar Dubey S/o Har Prasad Dubey Aged About 38 Years R/o. Village
     Sis, Tahsil Kota, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

                                                                         ---- Petitioner

                                        Versus

   1. State of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Panchayat And Rural
      Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur, District-
      Raipur, Chhattisgarh

   2. Secretary School Education Department, State Of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi
      Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

   3. Collector Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

   4. Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat, Kota, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

   5. President Jan Bhagidari, Shiksha Samiti, Sis, Block- Kota, District- Bilaspur,
      Chhattisgarh

   6. Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Sis, Block- Kota, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

                                                                       ---- Respondents

For Petitioner : Shri Basant Kaiwartya, Advocate For Respondents/State : Ms. Akanksha Jain, Dy. GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 20/11/2019

1. The limited grievance which the petitioner has raised in the present writ petition is that he had worked as a Guruji between 01.07.2004 to 30.04.2010 when his services were discontinued.

2. According to the petitioner, some similarly placed persons subsequently had filed a writ petition which stood disposed of with a direction to the respondents 2 to decide the representation of the petitioners therein. According to the petitioner, while deciding the representation of those petitioners, the respondents have granted an order of appointment in their favour which has prompted the present petitioner to approach this Court now.

3. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, since the petitioner has made a representation to the authorities, let the authority concerned take a decision on the representation of the petitioner in accordance with its merit.

4. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the entitlement of the petitioner or on the merit of the case. The authorities are expected to pass an order purely in accordance with the rules and regulations governing the field and take a decision on the representation of the petitioner within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

5. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

Sd/-

Goutam Bhaduri Judge Ashu