Smt. Anita Singh v. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Surajpur
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Appeal No.442 of 2015
1. Smt. Anita Singh, W/o Shri Manoj Singh, aged about 25 years, R/o Village Khorsura, Surajpur, Police Station Surajpur, Tahsil and District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh
2. Smt. Saroj Gupta, D/o Shri Ram Surat Gupta, aged about 29 years, R/o Village Sohagpur (Karanji) Tahsil and District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh ---- Appellants versus
1. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Surajpur, Police Station Surajpur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh
2. Ku. Swati Gupta, D/o Shri Ramsurat Gupta, aged about 29 years, R/o Village Sohagpur Karanji, Police Station Karanji, Tahsil Surajpur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh
3. State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary Department of Panchayat and Social Welfare DKS Bhawan Mantralaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh now Mahanadi Bhawan P.S. Mantralaya New Raipur, Chhattisgarh
4. Collector, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh
5. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh
6. Sub-Divisional Officer, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh
7. Selection Committee (Shiksha Karmi) through the Chairman, Janpad Panchayat, Surajpur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Appellants : Shri Ashok Kumar Shukla, Advocate For State/Respondents No.3, 4 and 6 : Shri U.N.S. Deo, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Navin Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Judgment on Board Per Navin Sinha, Chief Justice 10/12/2015 1.
The present appeal arises from order dated 28.7.2015 in M.C.C. No.369 of 2014.
2.
The Appellants were appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade-III. Writ Petition (S) No.2173 of 2010 was preferred by the Appellants when the
Respondents purported to make an inquiry into the appointment. The Learned Single Judge is monitoring the investigation by the police. 3.
Pursuant to the investigation commenced, the services of the Appellants have been terminated. It is very fairly acknowledged that the termination has been challenged by them in another judicial proceeding and notices have been issued.
4.
We find no reason to interfere with the monitoring by the Learned Single Judge of the police investigation. We are also not pursued to hold a parallel proceeding when the termination order has already been challenged in a substantive writ application.
5.
The appeal is dismissed.
Sd/- Sd/- (Navin Sinha) (P. Sam Koshy) CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE Gopal