Gokaran Singh v. Amitabh Jain
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CONT No. 7 of 2016 Gokaran Singh S/o Late Ram Sharan Singh, Aged About 43 Years Working As Sub Engineer, Champa Division, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner
Versus
1. Amitabh Jain, Secretary, Public Works Department, Mantralaya, P.S. Rakhi, Tahsil Aarang, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2. D.K. Pradhan, Engineer In Chief, Public Works Department, Raipur, P.S. City Kotwali, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh
3. Vijay Kumar Bhatpahare, Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Bilaspur, P.S. Civil Line Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
4. R.S. Tomar, Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Champa Division, P.S. Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ..........(Contemnors) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :
Shri CJK Rao, Advocate.
For State :
Shri Ramakant Pandey, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 14/01/2016 Heard.
1.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even though order was passed by this Court on 24.12.2014, the steps, as directed by this Court in the order, have not been taken and no final orders with regard to petitioner's services have been passed till date. 2.
Upon being enquired, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the State Government is the appointing authority of sub-Engineer.
3.
The direction issued by this Court is required to be complied with by the State Government. However, I find that the petitioner has moved representation to the Engineer-in-Chief and the representation of the petitioner bears acknowledgement of receipt in the concerned Mantralaya of Public Works Department.
4.
In view of the above, it is found that though representation has not been directly addressed to the secretary of the department, a copy of the representation addressed to Engineer-in-Chief has also been sent to the Secretary.
5.
In view of the above consideration at this stage, I am not inclined to proceed in the matter, however, the petitioner is required to submit a representation to the secretary of the department with an acknowledgement due. The respondent No.1 who is stated to be presently holding the office of the secretary, is under an obligation to take necessary steps to ensure compliance of the Court's order within a reasonable time in the spirit of the order passed by this Court on 24.12.2014.
6.
With the aforesaid observations, the petition is disposed off. Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) J U D G E Rekha