Umesh Chandra Nande v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2052 of 2019 Umesh Chandra Nande S/o Late Sadashiv Nande Aged About 55 Years Presently Working As Block Coordinator (Mandal Sanyojak) Officer Of Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development Department, Blok Kunkuri, District- Jashpur, Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Commissioner Through Schedule Caste And Schedule Tribe Department, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Collector Through Jashpur, District- Jashpur, Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh

4. Assistant Commissioner Through Tribal Development Department, Jashpur, District- Jashpur, Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh

5. Vinay Choudhary Through Office Of The Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development Department, District- Jashpur, Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. CJK Rao, Advocate For State :

Mr. Sameer Behar, PL

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 25/03/2019

1. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order Annexure (P1) dated 27/02/2019 whereby the post of Block Coordinator (Mandal Sanyojak) of Block Kunkuri which was being held by the petitioner since 2004 onwards have been ordered to be given to the respondent No. 5.

2. The contention of the petitioner is that though respondent No. 5 has been posted in place of the petitioner but there is no place of posting given to the petitioner, as such the petitioner would be sitting idle at the same place when work would be discharged by respondent No.5. Counsel for the petitioner submits that when respondent No. 3, Collector had posted the respondent No. 5 in place of the petitioner, some suitable alternative arrangement should had been made also in respect of the petitioner befitting his stature of the substantive post that he holds.

3. Given the said grievance and the contentions put forth by the petitioner, let the petitioner make a detailed representation in this regard to the respondent No. 3 within a period of seven days from

today. On such representation being made, respondent No. 3 shall take a decision so far as the claim of the petitioner is concerned at the earliest preferably within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the representation.

4. Till the representation of the petitioner is decided by the respondent No. 3, let status quo as it exists today be maintained so far as the posting of the petitioner is concerned.

5. Certified copy today.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit