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 0]

Chattisgarh High Court

Vande Ram Bhagat vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 7 June, 2021

Author: P. Sam Koshy

Bench: P. Sam Koshy

                                             -1-


                                                                                  NAFR

                      HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                  WPS No. 1787 of 2021

     Vande Ram Bhagat S/o Larangu Ram Bhagat, (Nayab Tahsildar) Aged About
     53 Years R/o. Rajapara Sarangarh, Tahsil And District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
                                                                    ---- Petitioner
                                          Versus
     1.      State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Revenue
             And Disaster Management, Ministry Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur,
             Chhattisgarh
     2.      The Collector Raigarh, District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
     3.      The Sub Divisional Officer            (Revenue),   Dongargaon,    District-
             Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh
     4.      The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Dharmjaigarh/Gharghoda,
             District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
     5.      The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Sarangarh, District- Raigarh,
             Chhattisgarh

                                                                      ---- Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. Love Kumar Ramteke, Advocate For State : Mr. Jitendra Pali, Dy. A.G. Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 07/06/2021

1. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order of suspension dated 01.03.2021.

2. At the outset, this Court is of the opinion that there is an alternative statutory remedy available to the petitioner by preferring an appeal under Rule 23 under the Rules of 1966 under, which he has been placed under suspension. Moreover, the suspension is for non- compliance of an order of transfer issued as early in January, 2021. -2-

3. The order of transfer was never challenged by the petitioner and now after the disciplinary action has been initiated, the petitioner preferred this petition challenging both the orders.

4. Given the fact that the petitioner has been subsequently placed under suspension, reserving the right of the petitioner to prefer an appeal, if he so intends, the present writ petition at this juncture stands rejected.

Sd/-

(P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved