Smt. Sobha Nigam v. Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corporation ( Privahan Prabhag)
-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3744 of 2018
1. Smt. Sobha Nigam W/o Late Shri Janardan Prasad Nigam Aged About 50 Years Job Keeper, Ambikapur, Depot, R/o Village And Post- Naikin, Tahsil Rampur, Naikin, District Sidhi, Madhya- Pradesh.
2. Joseph Franklin S/o Late Shri B. Franklin Aged About 61 Years Aposter- Il, D. W. S. Rawanbhata, Raipur, R/o Laxmi Nagar, Mowa, Raipur, P. S. Mowa, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
3. Mahattam Ram Dhruw, S/o Late Shri Ram Lal Dhruw, Aged About 58 Years Helper, Jagdalpur, Depot, R/o Village Kade, Post- Barhi, Tehsil And P.S. Balod, District- Balod, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioners
Versus
1. Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corporation (Privahan Prabhag) Through Its Managing Director, Shastri Chowk, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
2. Madhya Pradesh Road Transport Corporation, Through Its Managing Director, Head Office Habibganj, Bhopal Madhya Pradesh. ---Respondents For Petitioners :
Mr. Vivek Kumar Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent/CIDC :
Mr. Soumya Rai, Advocate under instructions of Mr. Ashish Shrivastava, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 17/05/2018
1. Counsel for the petitioners submits that an identical issue came up before the Coordinate Bench on 15.11.2017 and the same has been disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to make a fresh representation to the respondent No.2 and it was further directed that respondent No.2 shall on receipt of the representation take a prompt decision.
2. Counsel for the petitioners submits that present writ petition also may be disposed of in similar terms as the grievance raised by the petitioners is identical.
3. Given the facts and circumstances, this Court feels that the prayer made by the petitioners to be fair and reasonable. Accordingly, the
-2present writ petition also is disposed of in similar terms as has been passed in the WPS No. 6005/2017 vide order dated 15.11.2017. Accordingly, the petitioners are at liberty to move a representation before the respondent No.2, before whom the claim of the previous set of petitions were under process.
4. On submission of the representation by the petitioners, the respondents shall as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two months shall verify and if the case of the petitioners are similar to the previous set of petitions or the petitioners in the case of WPS No. 6005/2017, their claim shall also be processed along with the similarly placed persons, whose writ petitions have already been decided vide orders dated 04.07.2011 and 16.12.2012 in WPS No. 6510/2009 and WA No. 419/2011.
5. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of at the motion stage. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved