Chattisgarh High Court
Anil Thakre vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 12 August, 2015
Author: Prashant Kumar Mishra
Bench: Prashant Kumar Mishra
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPS No. 2914 of 2015
• Anil Thakre S/o Late M. R. Thakre, Aged About 56 years R/o Behind Budh
Temple, Tikarapara, Civil Lines (Ps), Bilaspur (Po & Dist), Chhattisgarh
State. Pin 495001
---- Petitioner
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Home/transport Department, Govt.
Of Chhattisgarh, Secretariat, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, (Po) Raipur
Dist. Chhattisgarh Pin 493001
• Addl. Chief Secretary, Finance & Planning, Govt. Of Chhattisgarh,
Secretariat, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh State. Pin
493001
• Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd, Through Its
Managing Director, Sastry Chowk, Raipur (Po & Dist) Raipur Dist,
Chhattisgarh State. Pin 493011
---- Respondents
{Note: Cause title has been reproduced as is available in the CIS Software} For Petitioner : Ms. Veena Nair, Advocate For Respondent-State : Shri Shashank Thakur, GA for the State Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 12/08/2015
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was working in erstwhile M.P.S.R.T.C., however after creation of the State of Chhattisgarh a separate Road Transport Corporation has not been constituted in the State of Chhattisgarh, therefore, his services was placed in the control of respondent/Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development 2 Corporation (for short 'C.I.D.C.'). He would further submit that the State Government has issued number of circulars deciding to absorb services of the employees working in the erstwhile M.P.S.R.T.C in various Corporation/Mandals in the State of Chhattisgarh and in furtherance of the said policy several employees have already been absorbed.
2. Learned counsel would further submit that for the present, the petitioner would confine his prayer for issuance of direction to the respondent authorities to take a decision on the representation pending before the said authority. He is restricting his prayer in view of the order passed by this Court in the matters of O.P. Singh Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others 1, Abdul Hakim Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others 2, Uttam Kumar Sharma Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others 3, Raju Pandey & others Vs. The State of Chhattisgarh & others 4, Nandkumar Vaishnav & others Vs. The State of Chhattisgarh & others 5 and Chandrayan Singh Thakur & others Vs. The State of Chhattisgarh & others 6.
3. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that in the event petitioner submits fresh representation before the competent authority of the respondent within a period of four weeks, the said authority shall consider and decide petitioner's representation in an objective manner keeping in view the circular issued by the State Government from time to time, as also the orders of absorption passed with respect to the similarly placed employees, as early as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of submission of representation. 1 WP (S) No.5521/2010 2 WP (S) No.473/2013 3 WP (S) No.476/2013 4 WP (S) No.1220/2013 5 WP (S) No.1458/2013 6 WP (S) No.2128/2013 3
4. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the respondent authorities shall decide the matter, on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law, without treating any observation made in this order, as opinion on the merits of the case.
5. With the above observation, the writ petition is finally disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE Prashant Kumar Mishra ashu