Nirmal Kumar Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 957 of 2016 • Nirmal Kumar Sahu S/o Shri Gautam Singh Sahu, Aged About 35 Years At Present Posted As Clerk, L A M P S, Kondagaon, R/o Aalbedapara, Forest Colony Ward, Kondagaon, District Kondagaon, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Cooperatives, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

2. The Registrar Chhattisgarh Cooperative Societies, 3rd Floor, Indrawati Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

3. Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, (Chhattisgarh)

4. Chief Executive OfÏcer, District Cooperative Central Bank Limited, Behind Jhankar Talkies, Kevramunda Ward, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, (Chhattisgarh)

5. Vinod Kumar Sahu, S/o Shri Ramu Lal Sahu, Aged About 25 Years R/o RES Colony Gali, Maakdi, District Kondagaon, (Chhattisgarh)

6. Pinkesh Pandey, S/o Shri Basant Kumar Pandey, Aged About 27 Years, Village And Post Matnaar, Bakawand, District Bastar, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondent For Petitioner Mrs. Naushina Ali and Mr. Ajay Kumrani, Advocates For Respective Respondents Mr. R. Tripathi, Panel Lawyer, Mr. R.K.

Kesharwani, Mr. Prakash Tiwari and Mr. Aakash Pandey, Advocates Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 11/5/2017

1. Heard.

2. The petitioner participated in the recruitment of Computer Operator undertaken by respondent No.4. The petitioner secured 28.70 marks in the selection process, to which, 10 marks

was to be added as weightage for the petitioner's experience as Clerk, LAMPS, Kondagaon. The petitioner was informed by the document, which is available at page 42 of the paper book that for additional 10 marks, he should produce necessary documents for verification at the time of counselling. The petitioner appeared in the counselling and the documents were verified, but when the final list was published, the petitioner found that 10 marks has not been added to his total marks and thus, the persons having less marks than the petitioner, were offered appointment.

3. Mr. Aakash Pandey, learned counsel for respondent No.4, would submit that if the petitioner moves a representation along with all relevant documents before respondent No.4, the same shall be considered objectively and shall be decided by a reasoned order. He would also submit that that respondent No.4 shall deal with the petitioner's representation with an open mind without any prejudice manner.

4. In view of the statement made by respondent No.4, let the petitioner prefer representation along with all relevant documents before respondent No.4 within a period of 15 days from today and thereafter, respondent No.4 shall decide the same in accordance with law within a further period of 03 months.

5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- Judge (Prashant Kumar Mishra) Shyna