High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/2060/2017withdrawn

Santosh Kumar Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-05-01Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra3 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 2060 of 2017 • Santosh Kumar Sahu S/o Gangaram Sahu, Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Sakri, Post Chandi Bazaar, Tahsil Abhanpur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Director Panchayat, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. Collector, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh

4. District Education OfÏcer, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh

5. Chief Executive OfÏcer, Janpad Panchayat, Kurud, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh

6. Block Education OfÏcer, Kurud, Block Kurud, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh

7. Headmaster, Government Primary Boys School, Madeli, Block Kurud, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh

8. Headmaster, Government Primary School Chicholi, Block Tilda, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Petitioner Mr. RS Baghel, Advocate For Respondent /State Mr. Arvind Dubey, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 1/5/2017

1. Heard.

2. Challenge in this petition is to the relieving order dated 23.10.2015 issued by the Block Education OfÏcer, Kurud, District Dhamtari, whereby, it is alleged that under the garb of rationalization process, the petitioner, who is Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) was relieved for his posting at Raipur.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in the similar like nature of petition, the High Court by an order dated 23.12.2016, in bunch of petitions, have quashed the like nature of order, therefore, the petitioner in this case wants to withdraw the instant petition to make representation before the appropriate authority so that similar like nature of orders may be passed.

4. Learned State Counsel do not dispute the same.

5. Considering the fact that the cases of similar nature have already been disposed of wherein law has been laid down by this Court, petitioner is also given liberty.

6. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn with a liberty to the petitioner to make representation within a period of one month from today. Respective authority shall decide the same within further period of two months.

Sd/- Judge (Prashant Kumar Mishra) Shyna