Mohit Ram Sengar v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR W.P.(S) No. 7202 of 2011 Mohit Ram Sengar S/o Shri Gulsharan Ram Sengar, Aged about 48 years, At/Post Newsa, Block Officer-Gaurela, Dist. Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh through Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes Department Dept., D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG)

2. Commissioner, Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes, Raipur, C.G.

3. Assistant Commissioner, Scheduled Tribes Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, C.G.

---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Shri B. Gopa Kumar, Dy. A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 17/09/2015 Grievance of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is that the petitioner along with one Siyaram Bareth were appointed in the department of respondents as contingency paid employee. The dispute of the petitioner is that the said Siyaram Bareth who was appointed with the petitioner was absorbed by the respondents in their department in the year 1999 and has been given the benefit of retrospective effect since 28.01.1994. However, for some reasons the same has been denied to the petitioner.

2.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been repeatedly approaching the respondents on this issue seeking the benefits at par with the person who had been appointed along with the petitioner but the respondents have not decided the case of the petitioner till date. Counsel for the petitioner also refers to Annexure P-5 which is a representation made by the petitioner to the respondents.

3.

State counsel, at this juncture, submits that in case the representation of the petitioner has not been decided by the respondents, the same shall be considered by the Authorities. He further submits that if the petitioner wants, he may also make a fresh representation to the respondents in respect of his grievance giving details of his claim along with documentary evidence if any, and the same shall be considered by the concerned Authorities in accordance with the rules. 4.

In the light of the submission made by the State counsel, nothing further remains for adjudication in the instant writ petition. 5.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to approach the respondents within a period of 15 days from today by making a detailed representation in respect of his claim along with documentary proofs, if any and on receipt of the same, the Authorities concerned shall take a prompt decision taking into consideration the benefits which have been granted to the similarly placed persons. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) JUDGE Bhola