Resham Lal Kurre v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 1259 of 2021 Resham Lal Kurre S/o Jivan Lal Kurre Aged About 44 Years Working As Peon At Govt. High School, Telasi, Block Pallari, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Director Directorate Of Public Instruction, Chhattisgarh, Indravati Bhawan, Block - 3, 1st Floor, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Collector District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh

4. District Education Officer Baloda Bazar Bhatapara, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : BalodabazarBhathapara, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For the Petitioner :

Shri Govind Dewangan, Advocate For the Respondents :

Shri Rahul Jha, Govt. Advocate ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board /03/2021

1. The limited grievance that the Petitioner has in the instant case is the inaction on the part of the Respondents in not regularizing the services of the Petitioner in spite of the fact that the Petitioner has put in more than ten years of service.

2. Grievance of the Petitioner is that the persons who have been appointed along with the Petitioner for the same appointment order and posted at different districts have since been regularized, however, the claim of the Petitioner has not been considered though the

Petitioner has also been representing the matter to the respondent authorities since long.

3. Learned Counsel for Petitioner at this juncture submits that let the respondent authorities take an appropriate decision in the case of the Petitioner at the earliest.

4. To the limited prayer made by the Petitioner, learned State Counsel has no objection.

5. Accordingly, the Respondents No. 2 & 4 are directed to consider the claim of the Petitioner for regularization, considering the fact that the other persons who have been appointed along with the Petitioner for the same appointment order in other districts have also been regularized. Let a decision in this regard be taken by the respondent authorities, at the earliest, preferably within a period of ninety days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

6. Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/-Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Vasant