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

Gend Ram Gandharv & Ors vs State Of Chhattisgarh & Ors on 6 May, 2015

Author: Prashant Kumar Mishra

Bench: Prashant Kumar Mishra

                                                                     NAFR

            HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                        WP (S) No. 1736 of 2015

1.   Gend Ram Gandharv, S/o Shri Aditya Ram Gandharv,, Aged About 57
     years, Occupation Working as Work Charged Rig Operator in the Office
     of Sub Divisional Officer (E/M), Public Health Engineering, Mungeli
     Naka, Bilaspur, (Chhattisgarh)

2.   P.M. Sigonte, S/o Shri Madhukar Sigonte, Aged About 59 Years
     Occupation Working as Work Charged Rig Operator In the Office Of Sub
     Divisional Officer (E/M), Public Health Engineering, Rawanbhata,
     Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

3.   Kriparam Sahu, S/o Shri Anand Ram Sahu, Aged About 58 ½ Years
     Occupation Working As Work Charged Rig Operator In the Office Of
     Sub Divisional Officer (E/M), Public Health Engineering, G.P.I. Road,
     Behind R.T.O. Office, Mahasamund, (Chhattisgarh)

4.   N.R. Khan, S/o Shri Swenehu Khan, Aged About 59 Years, Occupation
     Working As Work Charged Rig Operator in the Office Of Sub Divisional
     Officer (E/M), Public Health Engineering, Gokulpur Nayapara, Dhamtari,
     (Chhattisgarh)

5.   Bhanuram Nayak, S/o Shri Shivaji Ram Nayak Aged About 58 Years
     Occupation Working As Work Charged Rig Operator In The Office Of
     Sub Divisional Officer (E/M), Public Health Engineering, Rawanbhata,
     Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

6.   Ravi Sona, S/o Shri Rajiv Sona, Aged About 57 Years, Occupation
     Working As Work Charged Rig Operator In The Office Of Sub Divisional
     Officer (E/M), Public Health Engineering, G.P.I. Road, Behind R.T.O.
     Office, Mahasamund, (Chhattisgarh)

7.   Tara Chand Soni, S/o Shri Ram Prasad Soni, Aged About 59 Years
     Occupation Working As Work Charged Rig Operator In The Office Of
     Sub Divisional Office (Electrical/Mechanical), Near Collectorate, Durg,
     (Chhattisgarh)

8.   Ram Bhau Jadhav, S/o Shri Kundalik Jadhav Aged About 59 Years
     Occupation Working As Work Charged Rig Operator In The Office Of
     Sub Divisional Officer (E/M), Public Health Engineering, Rawanbhata,
     Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

9.   Dukhi Ram Yadav, S/o Shri Sakharam Yadav Aged About 58 Years
     Occupation Working As Work Charged Rig Operator In The Office Of
     Sub Divisional Officer (E/M), Public Health Engineering, Mungeli Naka,
     Bilaspur, (Chhattisgarh)

10. Jagdish Prasad Mishra S/O Shri Ram Nidhi Mishra Aged About 58 Years
    Occupation Working As Work Charged Rig Operator In The Office Of
    Sub Divisional Officer (E/M), Public Health Engineering, Mungeli Naka,
    Bilaspur, (Chhattisgarh)
                                                                 ---- Petitioners

                                      Versus

1.       State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department Of Public
         Health Engineering, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

2.       Engineer-In-Chief, Public Health Engineering, Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

3.       Superintendent Engineer, Division (E/M) Public Health Engineering,
         Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)


                                                             ---- Respondents

For Petitioners Shri Vinay Pandey, Advocate For Respondent/State Shri Shashank Thakur, GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 06/05/2015

1. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners had earlier preferred a writ petition being W.P. (S) No.1050/2013, which was disposed of on 16.04.2013 reserving liberty in favour of the petitioners to pursue their representation, however, despite having preferred representation, respondents have not decided the same even after lapse of more than 2 years period.

3. Considering the order passed by this Court on 16.04.2013 in W.P. (S) No.1050/2013, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the petitioners' pending representation at the earliest, preferably within a period of 6 months from today.

JUDGE Nirala