High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/1995/2020disposed off

Hermanus Kujur v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2020-06-01Hon'Ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 1995 of 2020 • Hermanus Kujur S/o Late Shri Alois Kheta Kujur Aged About 52 Years R/o Behind Boys Janpad Panchayat School, Mangala, Bilaspur, Tahsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Finance, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Director, Treasury Accounts And Pension Indrawati Bhawan, Block-1, First Floor, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Chhatttisgarh,

3. Shanti Xaxa S/o Late Shri Thomas Xaxa Aged About 52 Years R/o Directorate Health Service, 3rd Floor Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

4. Jerom Ekka S/o Late Shri Joseph Ekka Joint Director (Finance) State Election Commissin, Near Old Mantralaya, D. K. S. Bhavan Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Amit Soni, Advocate For State :

Mr. Vimlesh Bajpai, G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 01/06/2020

1. Heard

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was senior to the respondents No. 3 & 4 namely Shanit Xaxa and Jerom Ekka, as per the gradation list (Annexure P/4) published in the year 1997. He would submit that according to such gradation list, the name of the petitioner was over and above the respondents No. 3 & 4 and

thereafter, a new gradation list was published in which the petitioner has been placed below the seniority of the respondents No. 3 & 4. In order to correct the same, the petitioner has made several representations and at this stage, the limited prayer of the petitioner is that his representation may be decided.

3. Considering the limited prayer made by the petitioner, it is directed that the petitioner shall be at liberty to make a detailed representation along with all relevant documents to the respondent No. 2 within a period of 3 weeks and after receipt of such representation, the respondent No. 2 is directed to decide the same within a further period of 90 days from the date of receipt of the representation. The petitioner further would be at liberty to challenge the order passed in respect of his representation, if he is aggrieved by such order, if any.

4. With the above directions, the writ petition stands disposed off. Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Vishakha