Madhya Pradesh High Court
Jitendra Chourasiya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 October, 2020
Author: Vishal Mishra
Bench: Vishal Mishra
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
W.P. No.15098/2020
(Jitendra Chourasiya and Anr. vs. State of M.P.)
Gwalior, Dated : 13.10.2020
Shri Ashok Kumar Chakarvarti, counsel for the petitioners.
Shri Vishal Tripathi, Panel Lawyer for the respondents/State.
In the wake of unprecedented and uncertain situation due to outbreak of the Novel Corona Virus (COVID-19) and considering the advisories issued by the government of India, this petition has been heard and decided through video conferencing to maintain social distancing. The parties are being represented by the respective counsel through video conferencing, following the norms of social distancing/physical distancing in letter and spirit.
Heard.
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed wherein no specific order has been challenged but seeks direction of this Court in the matter of regular appointment on suitable post/LDC.
It is submitted that the petitioners were appointed as Section Writer in Tehsil Office Tyonda, District Vidisha vide order dated 13.08.2010 and 1.6.2010 respectively and since then they are performing their duties continuously. The petitioners are fully qualified for the post of LDC/Assistant Grade III. The petitioners have filed a representation Annexure P/6 in this regard before the respondent No.2/Collector Vidisha, which is still pending. It is prayed that the authorities may be directed to decide their representation at an early date.
It is further submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that the controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court at Principal Seat, 2 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH W.P. No.15098/2020 (Jitendra Chourasiya and Anr. vs. State of M.P.) Jabalpur in W.P. No.9170/2019 (Ku.Rubina Nisha Vs. The State of M.P. & ors. ) and prayed to dispose of this petition on the same terms.
Counsel for the State has no objection to the innocuous prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner.
In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to submit a fresh representation to the respondent No.2/Collector, District Vidisha within a period of seven working days along with all the relevant documents and a copy of this order and in turn the respondent No.2/Collector District Vidisha is directed to decide the representation of the petitioners in the light of order passed in W.P. No.9170/2019 (supra) within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In case the petitioners are similarly situated, same benefit may be extended to them. In case the authorities found that the petitioners are not similarly situated, a speaking order may be passed and communicate the same to the petitioners.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
With the aforesaid direction, this petition stands disposed of. E- copy of this order be provided to the petitioners and it is made clear that E-copy of this order shall be treated as certified copy for practical purposes in respect of this order.
(Vishal Mishra) Judge van SMT VANDANA VERMA 2020.10.13 18:43:34
-07'00'