Narayan Prasad Baghel v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 2919 of 2021

1. Narayan Prasad Baghel S/o Late Bhukhan Lal Baghel Aged About 54 Years Working As Driver, At Municipal Corporation Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

2. Ashok Kumar Suryvanshi S/o Ramaand Suryavanshi Aged About 52 Years Working As Farash Cum Choukidar At Municipal Corporation Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

---Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development , Department, Mantralaya , Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur Atal Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh.,

2. Director Urban Administration And Development, Department , Mantralaya, Indravati Bhawan, 4th Floor, Naya Raipur , Atal Nagar Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. State Urban Development Agency Through Its Chief Executive Officer State Urban Development Agency Raipur Rda Bhavan, 3rd Floor Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

4. Joint Director Office Of Urban Administration And Development Regional Office, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

5. Collector Office Of Collector Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

6. Municipal Corporation Bilaspur Through Its Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Bilaspur , District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ---Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate.

For State :

Shri Rahul Jha, Govt. Advocate.

For Respondents 3&6 :

Shri Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 24.06.2021 .

1. The limited prayer that the petitioners have made in this petition is for an appropriate direction to the respondents No.1&2 to take a decision on the representation which the petitioners have made seeking for posting the petitioners back to their parent department i.e. under the office of Urban Administration and Development.

2. According to the petitioners, they were initially appointed under the office of Urban Administration and Development and were working there when

-2they were posted to Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur and since then the petitioners continue to work under the Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur.

3. The limited prayer that the petitioners now seek is for a direction that the respondents may consider posting the petitioners back to the office of Urban Administration and Development. He further submits that the respondents No.1&2 in the recent past have considered couple of request of this nature of similarly placed persons and also have acceded to their request and therefore the case of the petitioners be also considered on the ground of parity with similarly placed persons.

4. The counsel for respondents No.3&6 do not oppose the prayer made by the petitioners.

5. Given the limited grievance that the petitioners have, the writ petition at this juncture stands disposed of directing the respondents No.1&2 to take appropriate decision on the request made by the petitioners at the earliest preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. While deciding the same, the authorities may consider similar relief being granted to similarly placed persons.

6. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge inder