South Eastern Coalfield Limited v. Ganesh Lal Soni

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC NO. 268 OF 2020 1.

South Eastern Coalfield Limited, through Chairman Cum Managing Director (CMD), Head Quarter at Seepat Road, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. (In the cause title of order dated 04-09-2019, the address of Applicant/Respondent No.1 is wrongly mentioned as District Korba, Chhattisgarh) 2.

The General Manager, Dipka Area, South Eastern Coalfield Limited, Tehsil Kathghora, District Korba, Chhattisgarh.

3.

The Chief Project Officer, Dipka Expansion Project, South Eastern Coalfield Limited, Tahsil Kathghora, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicants versus • Ganesh Lal Soni, S/o Late Shri Tejnath Soni, aged about 55 years, Occupation- Serviceman (Category II), Dipka Expansion Project, South Eastern Coalfield Limited, R/o Quarter No M.D. 791, Dipka Colony, Police Station Kusmunda, District Korba, Chhattisgarh.

... Non-applicant For Applicants :

Mr. Ritesh Giri, Advocate, under instructions of Mr. Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate.

For Respondent :

Mr. Vikram Sharma, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 13/03/2020 1.

The present MCC has been filed seeking extension of time for compliance of the directions given by this Court on 4.9.2019 while deciding WPS No. 6478/2019.

2.

What has to be realized is that the limited relief that the Petitioner had sought for was for an early conclusion of the departmental enquiry. Charge-sheets in the departmental enquiry were issued; one in the year 1995 and the other in the year 1999. Thus, so far as the first charge-sheet is concerned the same was issued about 25 years back and the second charge-sheet was issued about 20 years back. In spite of which, the applicant-management could not conclude the departmental enquiry for the reasons best known to them. 3.

When the aforementioned writ petition was disposed of on 4.9.2019, this Court had granted six months' time to the applicant-management for concluding the departmental enquiry. Even during the six months' period, the applicantmanagement seems to be unable to conclude the enquiry or has failed to conclude the enquiry and has moved the present MCC seeking extension of time.

4.

Learned counsel for the non-applicant submits that the non-applicant has already suffered trauma of facing enquiry for the last 20-25 years and there does not seem to be any material available for the applicant-management for early conclusion of the enquiry and there is no necessity for grant of extension of time, rather, the enquiry should be ordered to be dropped. 5.

Having heard the contentions put forth on either side and on perusal of record, particularly taking note of the submission that the applicant-management has made in the application for extension of time, this Court in the larger interest of justice grants three months' time starting from today to the applicantmanagement for concluding the departmental enquiry. It is made clear that if the applicant-management is unable to conclude the enquiry within the stipulated period, then no further extension of time shall be granted to them and the enquiry proceeding itself should be treated as dropped and necessary orders should be passed by the management in this regard.

6.

The MCC stands allowed and is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) /sharad/ JUDGE