Ashwani Kumar Banjara v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 3100 of 2015 • Ashwani Kumar Banjara S/o Late Shri J. D. Banjara, Aged About 44 Years Earlier Posted As Hostel Superintendent, At Pre- Metric S. C. Boys Hostel Lormi, R/o Ward No. 15, Lormi, Tahsil & P S Lormi, District Mungeli (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

2. The Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

3. The Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Mungeli District Mungeli (Chhattisgarh)

4. District Education Officer, Mungeli District Mungeli (Chhattisgarh)

5. C. L. Jangde, Presently Posted As Hostel Superintendent Pre- Metric Schedule Tribe Boys Hostel, Barampur, District Mungeli (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Ms. Ruchi Nagar, Advocate For Respondents-State :

Shri PK Bhaduri, GA for the State Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 25/08/2015

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that by order dated 16.06.2015, the petitioner was directed to obtain charge of Pre-Metric Tribal Boys Hostel, Barampur, however, he was not allowed to obtain the charge and in the meanwhile another order was passed on 6-7-2015 (Annexure P-2), directing him to obtain charge in the office of District Education Officer,

district Mungeli; this order was passed with reference to the circular dated 2-7-2015 (Annexure P-7) and the petitioner was relieved to join in the office of District Education Officer, Mungeli, however, by yet another order dated 10-7-2015 (Annexure P-1), the petitioner has now been posted in the office of Assistant Commissioner, Tirbal Development, Mungeli.

2. She would submit that three different orders have been passed within a span of one month's time in order to accommodate respondent No.5.

3. Shri Bhaduri, learned State counsel would refer to Annexure P-9 to submit that the petitioner has already joined in the office of Assistant Commissioner, Tirbal Development, Mungeli.

4. In view of the above, since the petitioner has already joined in the office of Assistant Commissioner, Tirbal Development, Mungeli, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that in the event, the petitioner prefers a representation before the respondent No.3, the said officer shall consider and decide the same expeditiously.

5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the respondent authorities shall decide the matter, on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law, without treating any observation made in this order, as opinion on the merits of the case. Sd/- Judge Prashant Kumar Mishra ashu