Jagdish Prasad Gautam v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 2831 of 2018 Jagdish Prasad Gautam S/o Shri Shiv Prasad Gautam, aged about 43 years, R/o 16th Battalion, Chhattisgarh Armed Force (CAF), India Reserve, Narayanpur, Tahsil, Police Station and District Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh through its Secretary, Department of Home/Police, Mahanadi, Mantralaya, Police Station and Post Rakhi, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Director General of Police (D.G.P.), Police Headquarters (PHQ), Sector 19, near Mahanadi Mantralaya, Police Station and Post - Rakhi, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Additional Director General of Police (A.D.G.P.), Chhattisgarh Armed Force (C.A.F.), Police Headquarters (PHQ), near Mahanadi Mantralaya, Police Station and Post - Rakhi, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

4. Inspector General of Police (I.G.P.) Chhattisgarh Armed Force (CAF), Police Headquarters (PHQ), Sector - 19, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Police Station and Post - Rakhi, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

5. Commandant, Chhattisgarh Armed Force (CAF), 16th Battalion, Narayanpur, District Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Abhishek Pandey, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Shri B. Gopa Kumar, Dy. Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 05/04/2018 The dispute in the present writ petition is that the petitioner was absorbed by the Department by different orders passed by the respondents at

different point of time. However, vide impugned order dated 09.08.2016 the order of absorption of the petitioner stood cancelled. 2.

It is this order of cancellation of absorption which is under challenge in the present writ petition.

3.

At the outset, counsel for the parties fairly submit that the issue involved in the present case has already been adjudicated upon by this Court in a series of writ petitions, the first being a bunch of writ petitions leading case among them is WPS No. 5558/2016 decided on 22.03.2017. Subsequently, relying upon the said order, this High Court has further allowed other similar petitions which have been affected by the impugned order dated 09.08.2016. 4.

In view of the admitted fact that the issue involved in the case has already been decided by this Court vide its order dated 22.03.2017 in WPS No. 5558/16 and other similar petitions, the present writ petition also deserves to be and is accordingly allowed on the ground of parity. The impugned order in relation to the present petitioner is quashed on the same terms and conditions as ordered by this Court in WPS No. 5558/2016 and the batch of matters decided on 22.03.2017 with the Consequences to follow. 5.

The writ petition thus stands allowed and disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) JUDGE Bhola