Firdosh Ekka v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 1337 of 2021 • Firdosh Ekka S/o Shri Silbanus Ekka Aged About 58 Years R/o Ward No. 12, Near Old G.M. Office, Chirmiri, District Koriya Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Home Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

2. Director General Of Police Chhattisgarh, Nava Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

3. Inspector General Of Police Sarguja Range, Ambikapur, District Sarguja (Chhattisgarh).

4. Superintendent Of Police Koriya, Baikunthpur, District Koriya (Chhattisgarh).

---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mrs. Meena Shastri, Advocate For State/Respondents : Mr. Sudeep Verma, Dy. G. A. Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 24/03/2021 1.

The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order dated 08.03.2014 vide Annexure P/1 whereby the petitioner has been inflicted with the punishment of stoppage of one increment and information to that effect has been given to the petitioner vide order dated 23.02.2015 vide Annexue P-2.

2.

At the out set, this Court is of the opinion that the petition suffers from delay & laches for the reason that the petition has filed the present writ petition after more than 7 years from the date of issuance of the impugned orders. Moreover, all these periods, the petitioner does not seem to have agitated before any authority in respect of the said action

of the respondents. Another reason, which has been assigned by the petitioner is that he was terminated from the service and in departmental appeal, the termination order has been modified to the extent of converting the termination order into the compulsory retirement and the petitioner has admittedly accepted the same and receiving his pensionary benefits on the basis of it. Thereafter, now he has raked up the issue and filed the present petition against the action, which took place 6-7 years back 3.

On this very ground of delay latches, the present writ petition deserves to be and is accordingly rejected. However, the right of the petitioner for approaching the Authorities by way of appropriate representation / appeal against his grievances stands reserved, if the law so permits.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Amita