Barewal Kannouje v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 3016 of 2015 • Barewal Kannouje S/o Late Shri Fandilal Kannouje Aged About 61 Years Post- Assistant Internal Account Examiner And Taxation Officer, Janpad Panchayat Manpur, District Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh), R/o. Sonarpara, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh), ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through : The Secretary, Panchayat & Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh),

2. Collector, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh),

3. Director Panchayat, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh).

4. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh),

5. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Manpur, District Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh), ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri JK Shastri, Advocate For Respondents-State :

Shri Shashank Thakur, GA for the State Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 19/08/2015

1. Petitioner is working as Assistant Internal Account Examiner and Taxation Officer, Manpur, district Rajnandgaon. He has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for payment of salary from the month of January, 2015 to July, 2015.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was

suspended on 07.01.2015, however, the suspension was revoked on 30.04.2015 without constituting any departmental enquiry. While revoking the suspension, the Collector (Local Elections) Rajnandgaon has treated the entire period of suspension as period on duty for all purposes, however, despite this, salary for the period from the month of January, 2015 to July, 2015 has not been paid to the petitioner. He would also submit that the petitioner has preferred representation on 14.07.2015 (Annexure P-5) yet nothing concrete has been informed to the petitioner, nor salary has been paid.

3. Considering the nature of grievance brought to this Court, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction that in the event, the petitioner prefers fresh representation before respondent No.2, the Collector Rajnandgaon, within a period of 15 days from today, the said authority shall consider and decide the same by a speaking order, at the earliest, preferably within a period of one month from the date of submission of representation.

Sd/- Judge Prashant Kumar Mishra ashu