Mukesh Sinha v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO. 3617 OF 2018 Mukesh Sinha S/o. Babulal Sinha, aged about 31 years, working as Sahayak Shiksaka (Panchayat) (Shiksaka Karmi Varg-III), Village Bhagwan Tola, Tahsil Ambagarh Chouki, District Rajnandgaon, R/o Vivekanand Nagar, Ward-22, House No. 138/1, Police Station Basantpur, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1.

State of Chhattisgarh, through Principle Secretary, Panchayat & Gramin Development Department, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2.

The District Magistrate & Collector, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 3.

The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 4.

The District Education Officer, Rajnandgaon, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 5.

The Block Education Officer, Block Ambagarh Chowki, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 6.

The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Ambagarh Chowki, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 7.

The Head Master, Primary School, Bhagwantola, Ambagarh Chowki, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Sunil Pillai, Advocate.

For Respondent-State :

Mr. Adhiraj Surana, Dy. Govt. Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 11/05/2018 1.

Grievance of the Petitioner is that the place where the Petitioner is posted ie. at Village Bhagwantola School under Block Ambagarh Chowki, District Rajnandgaon as Sahayak Sikshak (Panchayat) is facing threat on his life by a colleague teacher namely Vikas Manikpuri on the ground that the Petitioner has not participated in the strike by the Shiksha Karmis on earlier occasion. 2.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is not able to attend the duties on the ground of threat perception and that he has made repeated request to the higher authorities to either provide protection or to ensure that the Petitioner is posted anywhere else other than in Block Ambagarh Chowki. However, in spite of repeated representation no action has been taken on such representation.

3.

Given the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not intend to keep the petition pending any further rather ends of justice would meet if the writ petition itself is disposed of with a direction to Respondents 2 & 3 to consider the

case of the Petitioner and to pass a suitable order in the larger interest of the school as well as the Petitioner.

4.

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