Chattisgarh High Court
Pushkar Deo Dewangan vs Union Of India 44 Wpc/541/2014 Kuldeep ... on 18 July, 2018
Bench: Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Pritinker Diwaker
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Writ Petition (S) No. 3995 of 2018
Pushkar Deo Dewangan S/o Late Shri Bharat Deo Dewangan, Aged about 49
years, Working as Associate Professor, National Institute of Technology, GE
Road, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. Union of India, Through Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development,
Department of Higher Education, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi Pin Code 110 001
2. The Director, National Institute of Technology, Government of India, Ministry of
Human Resource Development, Department of Higher Education, Shastri
Bhawan, New Delhi Pin Code 110 001
3. National Institute of Technology, Through the Director, National Institute of
Technology, GE Road, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondents
For Petitioner : Shri Vikas Dubey, Advocate.
For Respondent/UoI : Shri B. Gopa Kumar, Assistant Solicitor General For Respondent No. 3 : Shri Prateek Sharma, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Pritinker Diwaker, Judge Order on Board Per Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Chief Justice 18/07/2018
1. Since the Government of India, Ministry of Human Resource Development has itself constituted a Oversight Committee to look into the issues arising out of 2 implementation of revised Recruitment Rules for Faculty and Non-Faculty of the National Institute of Technology, the grievances which is sought to be raised while challenging the revised recruitment rules in the present writ application is not required to be decided at this stage. It may amount to pre-empting the Committee from looking into the matter independently.
2. The writ application stands disposed off with liberty to the Petitioner to agitate the issue before the Oversight Committee which will examine the anomalies which is perceived by the Petitioner and make its appropriate recommendation.
3. It goes without saying that if the Petitioner is not satisfied with the decision or recommendation which may finally be taken by the Oversight Committee or of the Union of India, he will have the remedy in law.
4. The writ application stands disposed off in the above terms.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Ajay Kumar Tripathi) (Pritinker Diwaker)
CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE
Amit