Rajkumar Sinha v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 1046 of 2021

1. Rajkumar Sinha S/o Shri Yadubanshi Sinha Aged About 57 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Co-Operative Extension Officer Udaipur R/o In Front Of Nawapara Charch Ambikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh.

---Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Cooperative Societies And Affairs, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Registrar Cooperative Societies Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. The Joint Registrar Co-Operative Societies, Ambikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh

4. Sub Registrar Co-Operative Societies, Ambikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh

5. President/sanchalak Mandal Adim Jati Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Dandgaon District Surguja Chhattisgarh

6. Mahbub Haidar Society Manager Adim Jati Sewa Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, Dandgaon District Surguja Chhattisgarh ---Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri A.N. Pandey, Advocate.

For State :

Shri Vivek A Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 12.03.2021

1. The present writ petition has been filed claiming for following reliefs : "10.1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to initiate the departmental proceeding and departmental enquiry against the respondent No.6 in pursuance of show cause notice dated 20.05.2020 Annexure P/6.

10.2. Any other relief or reliefs may also be granted to the petitioner which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."

2. At the outset, this court is of the opinion that from the perusal of the pleadings and reliefs which the petitioner has sought, it is evident that

-2none of the fundamental rights or any other rights of the petitioner has been adversely affected which has forced the petitioner to file present writ petition.

3. The present writ petitions seems to be more of the Public Interest Nature where he has sought for an appropriate disciplinary action against some third person, which otherwise is not sustainable under the writ jurisdiction particularly under the roster that this court has, that of Service Matter.

4. The writ petition accordingly on the ground of locus of the petitioner itself stands rejected. However, the petitioner may have all other rights open for pursuing his grievances on the administrative side before the competent authority.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge inder