High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/3491/2018disposed off

Alakhnandan Jaiswal v. Mandal Prandhak

2018-05-03Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava2 pages

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 3491 of 2018 Alakhnandan Jaiswal Shri Girwar Jaiswal, Aged About 50 Years R/o VillageMohatrateli, Thana- Lormi, District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh., District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Mandal Prandhak Chhattisgarh Rajya Van Vikas Nigam Limited, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Regional General Manager, Chhattisgarh Rajya Van Vikas Nigam Limited, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

3. Divisional Manager, Pariyojana Mandal Kota, Chhattisgarh Rajya Van Vikas Nigam Limited, Kota, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

4. Sub Divisional Manager, Pariyojana Mandal Kota, Chhattisgarh Rajya Van Vikas Nigam Limited, Kota, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Rajendra Patel, Advocate S.B. : Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 03/05/2018 Heard.

1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to respondents to consider petitioner's claim pursuant to various recommendations made by the Deputy Divisional Manager, Pariyojana Mandal Kota under Chhattisgarh Van Vikas Limited.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that earlier, services of the petitioner were terminated which was not challenged and attained finality. It appears that the petitioner sought to invoke compassionate ground upon

-2which certain recommendations were made by the Deputy Divisional Manger to the Divisional Manager. Those recommendations were made way back in the year 2012. A direction for consideration of re-appointment may be issued only towards enforcement of a subsisting right and not merely on compassionate considerations.

3. Therefore, no specific direction can be given by this Court. However, it will be open for the respondent authority to consider whether they need services of the petitioner and appointment on any compassionate basis.

4. The petition is accordingly dismissed.

Sd/-/-- -- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Praveen