← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/4759/2017disposed off

Rehana Begum v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-09-13Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No.4759 of 2017 Rehana Begum W/o Ahmad Ali, Aged About 39 Years Working As Unani Pharmacist (Compounder), Govt. Unani Dispensary, Munonpara, Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Health & Family Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Police Station Rakhi, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. The Director, Ayurved Yoga & Natural Medicine Unani, Siddh & Homeopathy ( A Y U S H ) Chhattisgarh, Indravati Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. The District Ayurved Officer, Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh. - Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Harish Khuntiya, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Shri Chandresh Shrivastava, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 13/09/2017 Heard.

1.

The petitioner's grievance is on account of non-regularization of her services though it has already been granted to similarly situated employee. 2.

At this stage, Shri Shrivastava, learned State counsel submits that at the time when the petitioner's case was considered, presumably, she was not qualified. Therefore, she was not given regular appointment along with employees, who were appointed along with the petitioner. He submits that if the petitioner has now acquired a certificate in Homeopathy Dispensing Course, her case would be examined by the competent authority and appropriate decision would be taken. 3.

In view of the statement so made, I am not inclined to keep this matter pending and the petition is disposed off with the direction to respondent No.2 to consider

petitioner's claim in the light of she having acquired necessary certificate as stated by him and decision be taken within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. If the grievance of the petitioner is not redressed, she would be at liberty to revive this petition. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. It would be open for the authority to decide the matter in accordance with law.

SD/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) J U D G E Tumane