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 1, Cited by 0]

Chattisgarh High Court

Pawan Kumar Sinha vs State Of Chhattisgarh 31 Wpc/2466/2018 ... on 25 March, 2019

Author: P. Sam Koshy

Bench: P. Sam Koshy

                                                 1


                                                                                          NAFR
                    HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
                                        WPS No. 2059 of 2019

             Pawan Kumar Sinha S/o Dhansingh Sinha Aged About 32 Years Working
             As Assistant Lecturer Panchayat, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Tatenga,
             Block Dondi Lohara, District- Balod, Chhattisgarh., District : Balod,
             Chhattisgarh

                                                                                ---- Petitioner

                                               Versus

        1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And
             Rural Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh.,
             District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

        2. Commissioner-Cum-Director Directorate Of Panchayat, Naya Rapur,
             Disrtict- Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

        3. Chief Executive Officer Jila Panchayat Balod, District- Balod, Chhattisgarh.,
             District : Balod, Chhattisgarh

                                                                          ---- Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. Harish Khuntiya, Advocate For State : Mr. Anshuman Shrivastava, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 25/03/2019

1. The Petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the Respondents, whereby the increment granted to the Petitioner is being withdrawn on the ground that he has not passed B.Ed/D. Ed examination.

2. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the issue with regard to withdrawal/non-grant of increment on the ground of having not passed B.Ed/D.Ed examination was examined by this Court in the case of Jayant Kumar Patle v. State of Chhattisgarh (WPS 2 No.4271 of 2017 and batch of petitions, vide order dated 03.11.2017) and various directions have been issued for affording proper opportunity of hearing and then decide the matter.

3. Learned Counsel for the State submits that the Petitioner's claim would be examined after affording opportunity of hearing in terms of order dated 03.11.2017 passed in the case of Jayant Kumar Patle (supra).

4. Considering the aforesaid submission, this petition is finally disposed of, with a direction to the Respondents for examination of Petitioner's claim in terms of order passed by this Court in the case of Jayant Kumar Patle (supra) and take appropriate decision thereon.

5. The writ petition stands accordingly disposed off.

Sd/-

(P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit