Yogesh Dixit And 02 ORS. v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2192 of 2007

1. Yogesh Dixit S/o Late Shri R.C.Dixit, aged about 42 years, Occupation Service, Fisheries Extension Worker, Fish Farmers Development Agency, R/o Tilak Nagar, Near Indira Setu, Bilapur (C.G.).

2. Rajesh Verma S/o Late Shri G.D.Verma, aged about 42 years, Occupation Service, Fisheries Extension Worker, Fish Farmers Development Agency, R/o Near Sai Darbar Temple, Shrikant Verma Marg, Bilaspur (C.G.).

3. Satish Menon S/o Shri K.N.R.Menon, aged about 42 years, Occupation Service, Fisheries Extension Worker, Fish Farmers Development Agency, R/o Idgah Road, Aishwarya Bhawan, Bilaspur (C.G.). ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Government of Chhattisgarh, In the Fisheries Department Mantralaya, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.).

2. Director, Directorate of Fisheries, Ravi Gram, Telibandha, Raipur (C.G.).

3. Chairman, Fish Farmers Development Agency, Zila Panchayat Bldg, Bilaspur (C.G.).

4. Chief Executive Officer, Fish Farmers Development Agency, Zila Panchayat Bldg., Bilaspur (C.G.).

---Respondents For petitioners :

Shri Ranbir Singh Marhas, Advocate.

For State :

Shri Shashank Thakur, Government Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 04/04/2018 1.

The present Writ Petition has been filed seeking direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for absorption in the Fisheries Department.

2.

The counsel for the petitioners today brought to the notice of this Court the order dated 21/03/2013 whereby the services of the petitioners have infact been absorbed in the Fisheries Department of the State Government and as such the substantive grievance of the petitioners stands redressed. 3.

Though the counsel for the petitioners submits that, the absorption has been made at much belated stage after the petitioners had put in about 2 1⁄2 decades of service, they would be at a loss so far as their past service is concerned and they may also be adversely affected so far as the future promotional avenues are concerned.

4.

Considering the fact that the substantive relief sought for by the counsel for the petitioners in the present Writ Petition has been pending the petition granted to the petitioners, the present Writ Petition as such has become infructous.

5.

Leaving open to represent so far as subsequent grievance if any to the petitioners is concerned, by making a suitable representation to the department, the present Writ Petition stands dismissed as having become infructous.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Sumit JUDGE