Mohit Ram Kashyap v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1586 of 2019

1. Mohit Ram Kashyap S/o Shri Lala Ram Kashyap Aged About 32 Years Occupation Guest Faculty Sociology Govt. Laxmaneshwar College Kharod District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. R/o Village Bapaputi Post Silli, Tehsil Pali, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

2. Meena Dewangan W/o Gaya Prasad Dewangan Aged About 48 Years Occupation Guest Faculty - Sociology Govt. Swami Atmanand College Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh. R/o Dewanganpara, District Narayanpur Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Principal Secretary, Higher Education Department, Mantralaya, Indiravati Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Commissioner, Higher Education, Block C - 3, 2nd And 3rd Floor, Indiravati Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Principal Govt. Lakshmaneshwar College Kharod, District Janjgeer Champa Chhattisgarh.

4. Principal Govt. Swami, Atmanand College Narayanpur, District Narayanpur Chhattisgarh.

---Respondents For Petitioners :

Mr. Chandradeep Prasad, Advocate For State :

Mr. Sameer Behar, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 07/03/2019

1. The present writ petitions have been filed in February, 2019. The petitioners have challenged the decisions of the State Government dated 01.07.2017 and 31.07.2013.

2. Perusal of the record would show that in the recruitment process, which were initiated in the year 2018, the petitioners have without any objection participated and have also been found selected and

-2each of the petitioners have been granted appointment at the place, where they have been found eligible and the petitioners have also resumed their duties on their being appointed.

3. Given the facts, that the petitioners have participated in the recruitment process and on being selected have joined the services, nothing further remains to be adjudicated in the present disputes. That as far as the dispute so far as the remunerations, which the petitioners are getting, it appears that the petitioners have till date not made any representation to the higher authorities in the Department for redressal of their grievances. The writ petitions, therefore, stand disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to make a suitable representation to the respondents supported with all relevant records in support of their contentions and the respondents in turn shall decide the same in accordance with rules and regulations governing the field.

4. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petitions stand disposed off. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved