High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/6388/2017disposed off

K. L. Prasad v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-11-23Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 6388 of 2017 • K. L. Prasad S/o Shri Rameshwar Prasad, Aged 58 Years Occupation Service, Presently Posted As Assistant Engineer/ Sub Divisional OfÏcer, Water Resources Department, Hasdeo ( R B C ), Sub Division No.1, Pantora, Block Baloda, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. Civil & Revenue District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Water Resources, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. The Engineer-in-Chief, Water Resources Department, Sihawa Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. The Chief Engineer, Hasdeo Bango Minimata Project, Water Resources Department, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

4. The Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, Hasdeo Barrage Water Management, Division Rampur Korba Chhattisgarh

5. S. N. Sai, Assistant Engineer OfÏce Of Executive Engineer, Hasdeo Barrage Water Management, Division Rampur Korba Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Petitioner Mr. VR Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent/State Mr. Adhiraj Surana, Dy. GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 23/11/2017

1. Heard.

2. Drawing attention of the Court to the order passed by this Court on 26.9.2017 in WPS No.5114 of 2017 and the contents of

the representation at page 31 of the paper book, it is argued that despite the order passed by this Court, the grievances raised in the representation have not been looked into by the competent authority in an objective manner. It is further put-forth that none of the issues raised in the representation has been dealt with by the competent authority, which undermines the order passed by this Court.

3. It is unfortunate that despite the direction by this Court in WPS No.5114 of 2017, the respondents have passed an order, which though appears to be a speaking order but the grievances or the grounds raised in the representation have not been dealt with.

4. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the competent authority is directed to look into the matter sincerely considering the previous order passed by this Court in WPS No.5114 of 2017, and deal with the petitioner's representation afresh specifically addressing the grounds raised therein.

5. Till the petitioner's representation is effectively dealt with in the manner indicated above, the petitioner shall be allowed to continue at Sub Division, Darri, if not relieved.

6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- Judge (Prashant Kumar Mishra) Shyna