Manharan Tamboli v. Union Of India And ORS.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 1719 of 2015 • Manharan Tamboli S/o Ramesh Tamboli Aged About 58 Years R/o Village Gatoura, Tahsil & District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Union Of India Through The Secretary, Human Resources Department, New Delhi India

2. Guru Ghasidas Central University Through The Registrar Koni, Bilaspur, Tahsil & District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

3. The Vice Chancellor, Guru Ghasidas Central University, Koni Bilaspur Tahsil & District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

4. Kul Sachiv Guru Ghasidas University, Koni Bilaspur Tahsil & District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner Shri Ashok Kumar Shukla, Advocate For Respondent No.1 Shri R. K. Gupta, ASG For Respondent Nos.2 to 4 Shri Ashish Shrivastava, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board By 28/09/2015 1.

With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.

2.

In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents to reinstate him with all monetary and service benefits w.e.f. 28.10.1997.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would refer and rely on the judgment rendered by this Court in the matter of Afjal Aajami v. State of Chhattisgarh and others in WPS No.5712/2010, decided on 13.03.2015.

4.

Shri Shrivastava, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 to 4 would submit that the representation filed by the petitioner is pending consideration before the competent authority of the University, therefore, the writ petition may be disposed of permitting the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation, in accordance with law.

5.

Considering the submission made by Shri Shivastava, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 to 4, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent University to decide the petitioner's representation, in accordance with law, at the earliest, preferably within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

6.

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.

Sd/- JUDGE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA Nirala