Smt. Gita Shukla v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 208 of 2015 Smt. Gita Shukla W/o Narayan Shukla, aged about 38 years, R/o Naya Sarkanda, Jabdapara Bilaspur P.S. Sarkanda District Bilaspur (C.G.) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1.

State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Department of Urban Administration & Rural Development, Science & Technology, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur (C.G.) 2.

Joint Director, Department of Urban Administration & Rural Development, having office at First Floor, Old RTO Office, Vyapar Vihar, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 3.

Commissioner, Bilaspur Division, District Bilaspur C.G. 4.

Collector Bilaspur District Bilaspur C.G.

5.

Additional Collector Bilaspur, District Bilaspur C.G. 6.

The Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat Pendra, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, Advocate For Respondent Nos. 1 to 5/State: Mr. S.P. Kale, Dy. Advocate General For Respondent No. 6 : None Hon'ble Shri Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, J.

Order on Board 29/08/2016 Heard.

1.

By this petition, the petitioner has aggrieved by inaction on the part of respondent No. 6, non-compliance of order passed by the Appellate Authority/ Additional Collector on 29/10/2014.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite categoric order passed by the Appellate Authority that respondent No. 6 should first offer appointment to the third selected candidate to join and upon failure, fourth

candidate has to be called in order to merit, the respondent No. 6 has not complied with the order of the Appellate Authority. It is also submitted that respondent No. 6 has not challenged the legality, validity and correctness of the order of the Appellate Authority/Additional Collector. 3.

From the return filed by respondent No. 6, there is nothing to reveal that against the order passed by Appellate Authority, any petition or appeal has been preferred.

4.

Therefore, in view of the above, respondent No. 6 has no option but to comply with the direction of Appellate Authority. 5.

Accordingly, the petition is disposed off with a direction to respondent No. 6 to comply with order dated 29/10/2014 of the Appellate Authority and proceed in the matter of appointment. Steps should be taken to offer appointment to the third candidate, in order to merit, and if that candidate does not turn up, the petitioner being next candidate should be offered appointment on the post of Lecturer (Hindi).

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Tiwari