Nandlal Singh vs Chattisgarh Public Service Commission ... on 15 September, 2021

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Chattisgarh High Court

Nandlal Singh vs Chattisgarh Public Service Commission ... on 15 September, 2021

Bench: Sanjay K. Agrawal

                                                  1

                                                                                             NAFR

                  HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                             Writ Petition (S) No.1082 of 2013

        Nandlal Singh, S/o Late Shri Ramchandra Singh, aged about 53
        years, Occupation Service, working as Assistant Grade-III, Posted at
        Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission, P.S. Civil Lines, Raipur,
        District Raipur (C.G.)
                                                              ---- Petitioner

                                              Versus

    1. Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission, through the Secretary,
       Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission, Shankar Nagar Road,
       Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

    2. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, General Administration
       Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District
       Raipur (C.G.)

    3. Chief Secretary, State of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, Mahanadi
       Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
                                                    ---- Respondents

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Petitioner: Mr. Vivek Tripathi, Advocate. For Respondent No.1 / Chhattisgarh PSC: -

Mr. B.D. Guru and Mr. Anuroop Panda, Advocates. For Respondents No.2 and 3 / State: -

Mr. Sunil Otwani, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Aditya Sharma, Panel Lawyer.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 15/09/2021

1. Mr. Vivek Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, would submit that earlier, the petitioner was working with the Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (MPSRTC), but his services have been taken in the Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corporation, Raipur and later-on, he was sent on deputation to the Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission, whereas some of the employees have been absorbed, but the petitioner's services have not been absorbed, therefore, appropriate direction be 2 issued for his absorption.

2. Mr. Sunil Otwani, learned State counsel, would submit that the petitioner's services have already been repatriated by order dated 16-

4-2013 which has been sought to be challenged in W.P.(S) No.1211/2013 and the petitioner has also retired from service, therefore, no direction can be issued.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions made herein-above and also went through the record with utmost circumspection.

4. A careful perusal of the record would show that joint representation has been made by the petitioner along with other employees on 4-7- 2011.

5. Be that as it may, the petitioner is at liberty to make a representation afresh to the Chhattisgarh PSC for his absorption within three weeks from today and it will be considered and decided in accordance with law within two months from the date of receipt of the representation. This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter.

6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s).

Sd/-

(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Soma

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Chattisgarh High Court