Aaju Ram Kaushik v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 7367 of 2017

1. Aaju Ram Kaushik Son Of Shri Pusau Ram Kaushik Aged About 47 Years Working As Teacher (Panchayat), Govt. Middle School, Mohbhattha, Block S. Lohara, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.

2. Shivcharan Sahu, Son Of Shri Aaju Ram Sahu, Aged About 42 Years Working As Teacher Panchayat, Govt. Middle School, Sighouri, Block S. Lohara, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.

3. Sonu Lal Mahobia, Son Of Shri Jawahar Lal Mahobia, Aged About 40 Years Working As Teacher Panchayat, Govt. Middle School, Ghirghosa, Block Kawardha, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.

4. Dinesh Singh Rajput, S/o Shri Kaushal Singh Rajput, Aged About 42 Years Working As Teacher Panchayat, Govt. Middle School, Sighouri, Block S. Lohara, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.

5. Sunil Kumar Awasthi, S/o Shri Ambika Prasad Awasthi, Aged About 47 Years Working As Teacher Panchayat, Govt. Middle School, Khariya, Block Bodla, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.

6. Ajay Singh Rajput, S/o Shri Daman Singh Rajput, Aged About 43 Years Working As Teacher Panchayat, Govt. Middle School, Gourmati, Block S. Lohara, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Director, Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Kabirdham, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents Shri CJK Rao, counsel for the petitioner/s.

Shri Manish Nigam, Panel Lawyer for the State.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 02/01/2018 Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the rules applicable to the petitioner did not require obtaining NOC before undertaking higher studies. He would submit that this issue was examined by this Court in WPS No.2530/2017 and batch of petitions in which, order was passed on 28/11/2017. Learned counsel for the petitioner claims that his case is also covered by the said decision. Therefore, his case is required to be examined by respondent No.3 in accordance with the said decision.

Without commenting upon the merits of the case, at this stage, this petition is disposed off with a direction to respondent No.3 to examine petitioner's claim in the light of order dated 28/11/2017 passed in WPS No.2530/2017 and batch of petitions referred to above and if his case is found similarly situated, appropriate decision may be taken within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Deepti