← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/1399/2015disposed off

Satyanarayan Choudhari v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

2015-04-23Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 1399 of 2015 • Satyanarayan Choudhari, S/o Shri Radhey Shyam Choudhary, Aged About 36 years, Working As Shikshak Panchya, Govt. Primary School Parstarai Tah & Dist. Dhamatari, R/O Village Kanwar, P.O. Kanwar, Tah- Gurur District Baloda (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary Panchayat Department, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

2. Janpad Panchayat Dhamtari Through C.E.O. Dhamtari, District Dhamtari (Chhattisgarh)

3. Block Development Office Dhamtari Through B.E.O., Dhamtari, District Dhamtari (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri RS Patel, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Shri Shashank Thakur, GA for the State Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 23/04/2015

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that although vide order dated 30-4-2014, the petitioner has been posted at Government Primary School, Parstarai, yet the respondents are not allowing him to join and perform duties. He would also submit that the petitioner has filed representation before the competent authority, which has not yet been decided.

2. Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the representation

filed by the petitioner shall be decided in accordance with law.

3. Considering the entire facts situation of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that in the event, the petitioner prefers fresh representation before respondent No.2, within a period of 15 days from today, the said authority shall consider and decide the representation, in accordance with law, within a further period of four weeks.

4. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the respondent authorities shall decide the matter, on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law, without treating any observation made in this order, as opinion on the merits of the case JUDGE ashu