Satish Kumar Chandrakar v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR W.P.
( S ) No.
of 201 Chowa Ram Sirmour, S/o Biseshar Pd. Sirmour, 51 years Electrician, Govt. Engineering College, Koni, Bilaspur, R/o F-16, Engineering College Campus, Koni, Bilaspur (C.G.) ---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of C.G., Through : The Secretary, Technical Education Department, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.)
2. The Secretary, Finance Department, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.)
3. The Director, Technical Education Department, Directorate, Raipur (C.G.)
4. The Principal, Government Engineering College, Bilaspur (C.G.)
5. The Principal, Government Polytechnic College, Korba (C.G.) ---- Respondents And W.P.
( S ) No.
of 201 Satish Kumar Chandrakar, S/o Late Reshamlal Chandrakar, 52 years, Draftsman, Govt.
Engineering College, Koni, Bilaspur, R/o F-2, Govt. Engineering College Campus, Koni, Bilaspur (C.G.) ---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of C.G., Through : The Secretary, Technical Education Department, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.)
2. The Secretary, Finance Department, Mantralaya,
Raipur (C.G.)
3. The Director, Technical Education Department, Directorate, Raipur (C.G.)
4. The Principal, Government Engineering College, Bilaspur (C.G.)
5. The Principal Government Polytechnic College, Korba (C.G.) For Petitioner : Shri B.D. Guru, Advocate.
For Respondents : Smt. Astha Shukla, Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board /01/2016 (1) W.P. (S) Nos. 1874/2015 & 1877/2015, involve common facts and common question of law and, as such, require consideration and disposal by the common order.
(2) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are working on the post of Electrician/Draftsman on adhoc basis since 18.05.1990; they have been regularized from 24.6.2011 ; and they are entitled for annual increment and, therefore, they may be permitted to file representation for redressal of their grievances before respondents No. 2 & 3 and the same may be directed to
be decided expeditiously in light of decision rendered by this Court in W.P. (S) No. 2466/2011 on 25.07.2013. (3) Prayer appears to be fair & reasonable.
(4) Be that as it may, if the petitioners prefer representations to respondents No. 2 & 3 for redressal of their grievances within a period of two weeks from today, the respondents No. 2 & 3 shall decide the same in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt thereof. (5) With the aforesaid observations, the writ petitions stand finally disposed of.
Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge D/-