High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/215/2014dismissed

Kirtan Lal Banjare v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS

2020-02-26Hon'Ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 215 of 2014 • Kirtan Lal Banjare S/o Ramayan Banjare Aged About 51 Years R/o Ward No. 12, Akaltara, Gurughasi Das Mohalla, Police Station Akaltara, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Director Public Instructions, Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. The District Education Officer Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Abhishek Pandey, Advocate For Respondents/State :

Ms. Richa Shukla, Dy. GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 26/02/20

1. Heard.

2. The instant petition is filed for the following reliefs:- 10.1 The Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus thereby directing the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner on the post of ad-hoc teacher, in the ends of justice. 10.2 The Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to direct the respondent No.3 to consider and decide representation of the petitioner Annexure P-7 within stipulated time, in the ends of justice.

10.3 Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper be awarded in favor of the petitioner, including cost.

3. The petitioner was initially appointed for a period of 5 months as ad hoc teacher on 02.11.1985 to 30.04.1986. After the period came to an end according to the petitioner again an appointment was made on 21.10.1986 till 30.04.1987 vide Annexure P-3. The petitioner contends that the said order could not be communicated to the petitioner as such consequently, he could not join. Thereafter, since the petitioner was ad hoc teacher certain litigation reached to the High Court and the order was passed that the entitlement of the likewise persons should be decided. Perusal of the record shows that the State has filed Annexure R-1 dated 17.08.2011, wherein it is stated that as per the order passed by the State Administrative Tribunal a committee was constituted.

Thereafter, after examination of the case of the petitioner it was found by the committee that the said persons were not entitled and the application for reappointment was not considered. Since with the lapse of time it appears that the issue has died its natural death, therefore, no relief can be granted to the petitioner at this stage and the petition has become infructuous. Accordingly, it is dismissed.

Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Ashu