Bhanu Pratap Sahu v. The State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

(D {E $§ng§a Beaoii

IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR

WRIT PETITION (s ) No. 44% 0F2m0 20/3 PETITIONER :

Bhanu Pramp Sahu S/o. Shri Bhagwa'r Prasad Sahu, Aged AbouT 35 years, OccupaTion- Service, Posted as Shiksha Karmi Grade - I, (1T GOVT. Higher Secondary School Raghunafh Nagar', Vikas Khand - Wadafnagar, Civil & Revenue DisTT.- Surguja Ambikapur' (C.G.)

VERSUS

/ RESPONDENTS :1.

The State of Chhaffisgar'h, Through the Secrefory Panchayaf and Social Welfare DeparTmenT Mahanadi Bhawan Capital Complex Naya Raipur, DisTT.- Roipur (6.6.) 2.

The CollecTor , Ambikapur, DisTT.- Surgujo ( 6.6.) 3.

/ghief Executive Officer DisTricf Panchayaf Ambikapur, Dis'r'r.- Surguja ( C.G.) /.

4.

Chief Executive Officer District Panchayat Korba, Distt.- Korba (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUEANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT.

1 .

PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER :

As stated in the cause title above.

xiv

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WP. (S) No.4426 of 201 3 PETITIONER Bhanu Pratap Sahu

Versus

RESPONDENTS The State of Chhattisgarh & others Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra '\\ Present :- Shri Sunil Sahu, counsel for the petitioner.

Shri Rakesh Jha, Government AdVocate for the State. ORAL ORDER (Passed on this 15'day of January, 2014) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

1.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is working as Lecturer (Panchayat) under the Zila Panchayat, Ambikapur and his wife is posted as Lecturer (Panchayat) under Zila Panchayat, Korba. He would submit that under Ruie 27 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Service (Recruitment and General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1999, the petitioner has moved an application before the C.E.O., Zila Panchayat Ambikapur along with N.O.C.

issued by Zila Panchayat Korba, however, his application for appointment under Zila Panchayat Korba has not been processed and no decision has been taken by the authorities. 2.

Learned State counsel would submit that the petitioner has not obtained N.O.C.

from Zila Panchayat Ambikapur which is necessary, because presently he is an employee of Zila Panchayat Ambikapur.

He would submit that even otherwise the N.O.C.

issued by Zila Panchayat Korba has expired in July, 2013.

3.

At this stage learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is desirous of moving fresh application with N.O.C. from both the Zila Panchayats and in such a situation concerned Zila Panchayat may be directed to consider his application in accordance with law.

4.

The aforesaid prayer made by the petitioner is allowed. 5.

ln view of the above, the petitioner would be at liberty to move fresh application in accordance with law after submission of N.O.C. from both the Zila Panchayats. On submission of such application the concerned Zila Panchayats shall decide the same in accordance with law and on its own merits.

.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. / rep-n»?Wf/ r sd/l- '

v /.

Prashant Kumar Mtstt fa '

Judge