Shuvro Bose And ORS. v. State Of C.G. And ORS.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4838 of 2010

1. Shuvro Bose, S/o. Late S.M. Bose, Aged about 45 years, R/o. Torwa Primary School Chowk, Torwa, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

2. Mukund Narayan Sahu, S/o. Shri Bhagirath Sahu, Aged about 40 years, R/o. Kargi Road, Kota, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh, through: Secretary, General Administration, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Additional Secretary, General Administration Department, Government of Chhattisgarh, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, Government of Chhattisgarh, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

4. Engineer-in-Chief, Public Works Department, Government of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

5. District Collector, District Collectorate, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ----Respondents For Petitioners :

Mr. K.R. Nair, Advocate For State :

Mr. Ashutosh Pandey, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 03/08/2018

1. The relief sought for by the petitioners in the present writ petition is for a direction to the respondents for considering the case of the petitioners for absorption in the Public Works Department.

2. The respondents in paragraph No.4 of their reply has held as under:- "That, it is respectfully submitted that in pursuance of the aforesaid policy and decision taken by the State Government, the petitioners were allocated to the Department of Public Works for their absorption and accordingly the process for absorption of the petitioners

is going on and after completing the necessary formalities, the appropriate order would be passed. It is respectfully submitted that vide letter dated 14.10.2010, the office of the Engineer-in-Chief, Department of Public Works, Raipur, Chhattisgarh has requested the Collector, Bilaspur for providing necessary information and documents to all the 41 allocated candidates for absorption in the department along with the petitioners so that the process for making of appointment would be initiated."

3. In the light of the stand taken by the State in their reply in paragraph No.4, this Court is of the opinion that nothing further remains to be adjudicated. That since the petitioners also have subsequently not filed any rejoinder, though about 8 years have lapsed from the date of filing of the writ petition, it appears that the grievance has been redressed.

4. Reserving the right of the petitioners to challenge any subsequent development, if they are aggrieved of, the present writ petition in its present form stands dismissed.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved