Savita Marskole v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 3704 of 2018 Savita Marskole D/o Shri Sundar Lal Marskole, aged about 42 years, Occupation Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) Government Primary School Ghotwani, Tahsil and Thana Saja, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary, Department of Panchayat and Rural Welfare Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Collector, Bemetara, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh

3. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat - Saja, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Pallav Mishra, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Shri Adhiraj Surana, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 16.05.2018 Challenge in the present writ petition is Annexure P-1 dated 28.04.2018 whereby the Collector, District Bemetara has refused to entertain the application for withdrawal of the appeal preferred by the petitioner.

2.

The relevant facts for adjudication of the dispute are that the petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher Grade-III (Panchayat) in the year, 2007. The services of the petitioner were abruptly terminated in January, 2017. Against the said order of termination, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Collector Bemetara which was pending

consideration. Meanwhile the order of termination stood recalled vide order dated 12.10.2017. As a consequence, the petitioner has been reinstated in service. Subsequently, the petitioner moved an application for withdrawal of the appeal pending before the Collector. It is this application which was rejected by the Collector vide the impugned order. 3.

This Court fails to understand as to on what pretext the Collector intends to decide the appeal on merits. Once when the petitioner who was the appellant before the Collector expresses not to press the appeal and wants to withdraw the appeal, there could be no reason whatsoever for the Collector to reject the application or to decide the appeal on merits particularly when the petitioner herself has stated in her application that her grievance stands redressed and she does not intend to pursue the appeal any further.

4. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned order is totally misconceived and is not maintainable and the same deserves to be and is accordingly set aside. 5.

The writ petition thus stands allowed. It is directed that the Collector, Bemetara should forthwith allow the application of the petitioner permitting her to withdraw the appeal. Let this exercise be carried out by the Collector, Bemetara within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Let the petitioner bring to the notice of the Collector the order passed by this Court for an early decision. Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge Bhola