Kanhaiya Lal Minj v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1969 of 2019 Kanhaiya Lal Minj S/o Shri Tetangu Ram Aged About 43 Years Presently Working As Assistant Grade - Iii, Nagar Panchayat, Dharamjaigarh, Police Station Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Urban Administration And Development Department, Mahanadi Bhavan, Atal Nagar, Police Station Rakhi, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Director Department Of Urban Administration And Development, D - Block, 4th Floor, Indravati Bhavan, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Joint Director Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

4. Nagar Panchayat Dharamjaigarh Through Chief Municipal Officer, Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Applicant :

Mr. V. K. Agrawal, Advocate For State :

Mr. Somkant Verma, PL For Res. No. 4 :

Mr. K. K. Singh, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 09/08/2019

1. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is the inaction on the part of the respondent No. 4 in not considering the promotion of the petitioner from the post of Assistant Grade -III to the post of Head Clerk/Accountant.

2. All the respondents have entered appearance and submitted their reply. In their reply the respondents have taken a stand that the

earlier proposal which respondent No. 4 had made, has been returned back as the proposal was sent after a much belated stage from the date resolution was passed by the Nagar Panchayat, Dharamjaigarh. While returning the proposal back to the respondent No. 4, State had directed the respondent No. 4 to send the fresh proposal. In response, counsel for the respondent No. 4 submits that they are now in the process of passing a fresh resolution and a fresh proposal in favour of the petitioner to the State Government and which shall be done at the earliest. It could not be done early because of the two Elections that were held, that of the State Assembly Election as well as the Lok Sabha Election.

3. Given the reply that respondents have filed, this Court is of the opinion that no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending. Ends of justice would serve, if the writ petition stands disposed off with a direction to respondent No. 4 to send a fresh proposal at the earliest as has been contended by them in their reply and State Government in turn shall take a appropriate decision on the said proposal promptly in accordance with law.

4. It is expected that respondent No. 4 shall take an appropriate decision in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

5. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed off. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit