Dr. Hemlata Tiwari Pathak v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO.3743 OF 2019 Dr. Hemlata Tiwari Pathak W/o Shri Rakesh Pathak Aged About 54 Years R/o - Behind Government Science College, Boys Hostel No.03, G.E. Road, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

...Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Energy, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Chhattisgarh State Power Holding Company Limited, Through The Managing Director, Chhattisgarh State Power Holding Company Limited, Vidyut Sewa Bhawan, Dangania, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Managing Director, Chhattisgarh State Power Holding Company Limited, Vidyut Sewa Bhawan, Dangania, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

4. Deputy General Manager, (HR) - II Chhattisgarh State Power Holding Company Limited, Vidyut Sewa Bhawan, Dangania, Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner :

Shri Yogendra Pandey, Advocate.

For Respondent-State :

Ms. Shriya Mishra, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 15.05.2019

1. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is declaring her ineligible for participating in the recruitment process for the post of Welfare Officer under the respondents.

2. According to the petitioner, she has all the requisite qualification that is required for the post, yet the respondents have published Annexure P/1 whereby the petitioner has been declared ineligible on account of not having minimum qualification as per the circular.

3. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already made a representation to the respondents in this regard requesting them to permit her to participate in the recruitment process or atleast be informed by the reason why she is not eligible or what is the qualification that she is short of.

4. The respondents have till date not taken any decision on the said representation of the petitioner.

5. Given the aforesaid facts, the present writ petition stands disposed of. Let the respondent No.4 take a decision on the representation of the petitioner at the earliest preferably within a period of 45 days from the date of reciept of copy of this order. The petitioner, in addition, would also be at liberty to file a fresh representation supported with all relevant records and documents in support of her contentions along with copy of the order passed by this court to the respondent No.4 for an appropriate decision at the earliest.

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