Anil Kumar Parate v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No.250 of 2017 Anil Kumar Parate S/o Pandari Sitaram Parate, Aged About 48 Years R/o Qtr. No. 17- F, Street No. 26, Sector- 4, Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through : General Administrative Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

2. High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee, Through : Its PresidentCum- Secretary, Scheduled Caste And Scheduled Tribe Development Department, Tribal Research Training Institute, Pt. Deendayal Upadhyay Nagar, Sector- 4, Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

3. Union Of India, Through : The Director, Ministry Of Personnel, Public Grievances And Pensions, Department Of Personnel And Training, Secretariat, Vallabh Bhawan, New Delhi.

4. Bhilai Steel Plant, Through : The Managing Director, Bhilai Steel Plant, Bhilai, District Durg (Chhattisgarh) --- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. T.K. Tiwari, Advocate For Respondents No.1 & 2 : Mr. Gary Mukhopadhyay, Dy.G.A., on advance copy For Respondent No.3 : Mr. R.K. Gupta, Advocate, on advance copy Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 19/01/2017 (1) Heard.

(2) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner on apprehension that in view of order dated 26.12.2016 passed by respondent No.2 i.e. High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee wherein it has been held that the petitioner does not belong to Halba Caste. The

Committee has made a recommendation for initiation of proceedings for dismissal from service against the petitioner. (3) Right now, the only apprehension of the petitioner that action may be taken against him on the basis of decision of the High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee, nothing any more. At present no notice for initiation of proceeding with regard to dismissal of service has been issued against the petitioner.

(4) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that earlier order has been passed in a similar case i.e. Mahesh Kumar Gonnade Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors. in WP(S) No.675 of 2016 decided on 09.01.2017 wherein action was taken by the Steel Authority of India and removed an employee from his service on the ground that he did not belong to Halba Caste, which was successfully challenged by that employee before this Court in Mahesh Kumar Gonnade (supra) and this Court held that termination order is bad. (5) Be that as it may, in absence of any notice to show cause against the petitioner, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed off. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to avail the legal remedy in case any action is taken or order is passed against him. Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge L/-