← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/1577/2014disposed off

Ghanshyam Chandrakar v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

2015-12-14Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 1577 of 2014 Ghanshyam Chandrakar S/o Late Kheduram Chandrakar, Aged About 56 Years posted as Patwari Halka No. 54, Aarang Police Station, Post & Tahsil Aarang, Civil & Reveneu District. Raipur (C.G.) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Revenue Department, Mantralaya Capital Complex, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Police District Raipur (CG)

2. Director, Collector Land Record, Raipur District Raipur, (CG)

3. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Office of Sub - Divisional Officer Abhanpur, District. Raipur (C.G.)

4. Revenue Inspector, Office of Revenue Inspector Circle, Aarang, Tahsil Aarang, District. Raipur C.G.

5. Teekaram Dewangan S/o Shri G.R. Dewangan, Aged About 53 Years Patwari Halka No. 63, Head Office Kumhari District - Raipur (C.G.) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr.Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate For Respondents :

Mr. Dhiraj K. Wankhede, Govt.Advocate No.1 to 3 For Respondent No.5 : Mr.Anjinesh Shukla, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 14/12/2015 1.

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, order dated 26.7.2013 transferring the petitioner to the post of Patwari Halka No.54, Arang was challenged by the respondent No.5 in Writ Petition (S) No.2477 of 2013, which was dismissed as withdrawn directing the authorities to decide the representation and even

thereafter, the petitioner has not been given charge of Patwari. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner may be allowed to make a representation before the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Abhanpur.

3.

The prayer appears to be fair and reasonable. 4.

The petitioner is permitted to make a representation before the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Abhanpur. If such representation is made, the said authority would consider and decide the same on its own merit and in accordance with law.

5.

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s).

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) JUDGE B/-