Surendra Kumar Tripathi v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (SERVICE) NO. 954 OF 2021 • Surendra Kumar Tripathi, S/o Shri Radheshyam Tripathi, aged about 50 years, working as Assistant Teacher, Govt. Primary School, Binaika, Block Masturi, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, R/o Nearby Mata Choura, Masturi, District Bilapsur (CG) ... Petitioner versus 1.

State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Panchayat and Rural Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) 2.

Chief Executive Officer, Jila Panchayat, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG) 3.

Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Masturi, District Bilaspur (CG) 4.

Block Education Officer, Masturi, District Bilaspur (CG) ... Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. K.S. Pawar, Advocate.

For Respondents/State :

Ms. Akansha Jain, Dy.G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board /03/2021 1.

The defaults pointed out by the Registry of this Court in the instant case as of now stand ignored.

2.

With the consent of learned Counsels appearing for the respective parties, heard the matter finally at admission stage itself. 3.

By way of the present Writ Petition, the Petitioner is claiming Kramonnati. 4.

According to Petitioner, he has already completed 10 years of service and is entitled for the benefit of Kramonnati.

5.

Learned Counsel for Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has also filed representations before the respondent authorities, but the same are not being considered.

6.

At this juncture, learned Counsel for State submits that if the Petitioner submits a fresh representation along with copy of the petition before the concerned competent authority, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law.

7.

In view of above, the present Writ Petition is disposed of. If the Petitioner files a fresh representation before the concerned competent authority along with copy of the petition within a period of one month from today, the said authority is

directed to consider and decide the same in accordance with law and on its own merits, as early as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of representation along with copy of this order. 8.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the respondent authorities shall decide the representation, on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law, without treating any observation made in this order as opinion on the merits of the case. 9.

Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) /sharad/ JUDGE