High Court Of ChhattisgarhWP/6303/2005allowed

M.F.Anasari v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

2017-11-06Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal3 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition No.

of 20 M.F. Ansari, S/o Late Shri M.H.Ansari, Aged about 42 years, Presently Posted as Principal, Industrial Training Institute, Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C.G.) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department of Higher Education, Technical Education and Manpower Planning, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.)

2. Director, Directorate of Employment and Training, Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.)

3. Joint Director, Directorate of Employment and Training, Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.) ---- Respondents For Petitioner:

Mr. B.D. Guru, Advocate.

For Respondent/State:

Mr. Ashish Surana, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board / 11 /201 Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the unreasoned and non-speaking order of recovery has been passed without considering explanation given by the petitioner.

(2) On the other hand, counsel for the State would support the impugned order.

(3) I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the impugned orderwith utmost circumspection. (4) A careful perusal of the material available on record would show that petitioner's defence is that he is not responsible for the aforesaid

incident and, therefore, he is not liable to make payment of compensation and even his explanation has been rejected on the ground that it is not satisfactory. The order imposing recovery involves civil consequence, therefore, it ought to have been decided by reasoned and speaking order, which has not been done, therefore, the impugned order is set aside. The matter is remitted back to the State Government for considering the matter afresh after affording due opportuntiy of hearing to the petitioner in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

(5) Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated hereinabove.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge D/-