Dr. Gulab Chand Patle v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Appeal No. 319 of 2015 Dr. Gulab Chand Patle S/o Shri Sukhdev Patle Aged About 45 years Occupation- Professor, At Present Incharge Of Principal At Govt. Navin College, Balauda, Permanent R/O Ward No. 6 P.D. Mahant Up-Nagar, Narharpara, Janjgir, District- Janjgir- Champa (Chhattisgarh) ---- Appellant
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Mantralaya At D.K.S. Bhawan (Now New Raipur) Raipur, District- Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
2. The Under Secretary, Higher Education Department, Mantralay, D.K.S. Bhawan (Now New Raipur) Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
3. The Director/ Commissioner, Higher Education, Science College Parisar, Raipur, District- Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
4. The Deputy Director, Higher Education,science College Parisar, Raipur, District- Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
5. The Principal, Thakur Chhedilal Govt. Post Graduate College, Janjgir-Champa, District- Janjgir- Champa (Chhattisgarh)
6. Dr. Smt. Alka Khandekar, Govt. P.G. College Dongargarh, District- Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh)
7. Dr. Smt. Ranu Meshram (Khaparde), Govt. Gundardhar College Kondagaon, District- Jagadalpur (Chhattisgarh)
8. Shri F.R. Bhardwarj, Govt. College Dabhara, District- JanjgirChampa (Chhattisgarh)
9. Dr. Smt. Rekha Rani Rajput (Kurre) Govt. College Jaijaipur, District- Janjgir- Champa (Chhattisgarh)
10. Dr. Phulchand Dhritlahare, Govt. College, Udaipur, DistrictAmbikapur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Appellant :
Shri Bharat Rajput, Advocate.
For Respondent No. 1 to 5 :
Shri U.N.S. Deo, Government Advocate.
HON'BLE SHRI NAVIN SINHA, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON'BLE SHRI P. SAM KOSHY, J.
Judgment On Board Per NAVIN SINHA, C.J.
30/6/2015 1.
I.A. No. 1 of 2015 has been filed to condone the delay of three days in filing the appeal. Considering the duration, it is allowed.
2.
Learned Counsel for the Appellant makes a very short submission that the Learned Single Judge should have fixed a time limit for holding of DPC considering the undisputed fact that no DPC had been convened since 19.8.2006.
3.
Learned Counsel for the State submits that there is already a direction to hold the DPC as expeditiously as possible, alternately, he may be granted adjournment to seek instructions. 4.
The Learned Single Judge has made an observation for convening of the DPC expeditiously. If no time limit is fixed for doing an act, it is required to be done within a reasonable time. Considering that no DPC has been convened since 19.8.2006 and it lay in the exclusive domain of the Respondents to do so and did not requiring a judicial order for performance of duties
prescribed under the rules for convening annual DPC, we consider a period of two months for the purpose as sufficient from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order, for convening the DPC. The Respondents are expected to carry out the necessary formalities and ensure that it is held within the time indicated in the present order. Any person required to act in furtherance of this order for compliance is bound to do so no sooner that the order is placed before it and no defence for not being a formal party shall be available to it. 5.
The appeal stands disposed.
Sd/- Sd/- (Navin Sinha) (P. Sam Koshy) CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE Subbu