Deenaram Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No.6396 of 2016

1. Deenaram Sahu S/o. Bahadur Lal Sahu, Aged About 30 Years Working As Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) And Posted At Govt. Primary School Suktara, Block Sahaspurlohara, District Kabirdham (Chhattisgarh)

2. Satish Kumar Nishad, S/o. Chintaram Nishad, Aged About 29 Years Working As Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) And Posted At Govt. Primary School Dashrangpurkhurd, Block Kawardha, District Kabirdham (Chhattisgarh)

3. Ku. Nafisha Bano, D/o. Mumtaj Saiyyed, Aged About 32 Years Working As Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) And Posted At Govt. Higher Secondary School Sonpurirani, Block Kawardha, District Kabirdham (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioners

Versus

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

2. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Kawardha, District Kabirdham (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioners :

Shri Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate For State :

Shri Aditya Sharma, Panel Lawyer S.B.:

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 24/11/2016 Heard.

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since the petitioners are a member of Panchayat Service, therefore, statutory representation is

-2provided under Rules 18(1)(b) of Panchayat Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999. It is contended that since the matter relates to promotion, therefore, the petitioners may be given liberty to move representation before the appropriate authority so that the statutory remedy, which is available to the petitioners may be exhausted.

2. The relevant Rule 18(1)(b) of Panchayat Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 as referred is quoted hereunder:- "18. Representation on other cases.-(1) A member of the Panchayat Service may make representation against an order which.- (a) x x x x x (b) denies promotion to a higher post or service to which is other wise eligible according to the recruitment rules and which is due to him according to seniority; or"

3. After going through the facts, it is directed that in case the petitioners makes a suitable application as per Rules 18(1)(b) of Panchayat Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 along with application for condonation of delay, if so advised and places their grievances along with all the documents, in such cases, the prescribed authority may decide the same within further period of three months on the facts available before it.

4. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the respondent authorities may decide the representation on its own merits.

5. With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands finally disposed off. No order as to cost(s).

Sd/- - (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge L/-