Dr. Purneshwar Pund v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Page No.1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Review Petition No. 10 of 2018 Dr. Purneshwar Pund, S/o. Mohanrao Pund, Aged About 42 Years, Presently Working As Vet. Asst. Surgeon at Checkpost Bortalao, Tehsil Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh, Pin 441495. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1.

State Of Chhattisgarh, through : Secretary, Pashudhan Vikas Vibhag Mahanadi Bhavan Raipur, Chhattisgarh, 492001. 2.

Director, Veterinary Services, Chhattisgarh, Block 3, Indravati Bhavan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492001.

3.

Deputy Director, Veterinary Services, Drug (Balod) Chhattisgarh. -----Respondents Dr. Purneshwar Pund, petitioner in person.

Mr. H.S. Ahluwaliya, Dy.A.G. for the State.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant & Hon'ble Shri Justice Ram Prasanna Sharma Order on Board by Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant 01/05/2019 1.

The petitioner present in person submits that he wants his writ appeal to be heard on merits.

2.

The petitioner had filed W.P.(S) No.4536/2012, in which on prayer made by the petitioner his petition was dismissed as withdrawn vide

Page No.2 order dated 14.03.2013 with liberty to prefer an appeal under Rule 23 of the M.P. Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 to challenge the order dated 20th June, 2012, by which penalty of stoppage of one increment without cumulative effect has been imposed against the petitioner. The petitioner then filed a writ appeal bearing W.A. No.178/2017, in which again on the request made by the petitioner, his appeal was dismissed as withdrawn granting him same liberty.

3.

As there is no statement in this review petition that there had been any mistake committed by this Court in passing that order, which is apparent from the face of record or any other sufficient reason, which may be taken into consideration.

4.

Clearly, it is a case, where the petitioner has not exhausted the remedy available to him on the departmental side and approached this Court to invoke the constitutional power. Therefore, after due consideration, we are of the considered opinion that review petition is without any merits, which is dismissed accordingly. Sd/- Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) (Ram Prasanna Sharma) Judge Judge Balram