Shailendra Kumar Shrivastava v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO. 1861 OF 2018 • Shailendra Kumar Shrivastava S/o Late B. P. Shrivastava, Aged About 42 Years, Working As Sub Engineer Public Works Department (Elec. & Eng.), Sub Division, Mahasamund, R/o Imlibhata, Mahasamund, Tahsil & District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1.
State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department Of Public Works Department, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya Naya Raipur, Raipur (C.G.) 2.
Engineer In Chief, Public Works Department (Elec. & Eng.), Sirpur Bhavan, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3.
Superintendent Engineer, Public Works Department (Elec. & Eng.), Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 4.
Executive Engineer, Public Works Department (Elec. & Eng.), Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner :
Mr. Hemant Kesharwani, Advocate.
For Respondents :
Mr. Sangarsh Pandey, Dy. A.G..
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 09/04/2018 1.
Challenge in the present writ petition is to the order dated 6.12.2017 (Annexure P-1) whereby the Petitioner has been inflicted with punishment of stoppage of two increments with noncumulative effect. 2.
The order under challenge is an appealable order under the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules and the perusal of record shows that the Petitioner has till date not preferred an appeal to the appellate authority and has straightaway filed the present writ petition. 3.
Given the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present writ petition at this juncture, reserving the right of the Petitioner to prefer an appeal against the impugned order before the appellate authority within a period of two weeks from today. The appeal shall be entertained by the appellate authority who in turn shall pass suitable orders in accordance with the merits of the case. It is expected that the appellate authority shall consider all the objections and grounds that would be raised by the Petitioner in the appeal.
4.
With the above observations, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) /sharad/ Judge