High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/212/2016dismissed

Abhisek Sonkar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2016-02-12Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No.

of 201 • Abhisek Sonkar, aged about 32 years, son of Shri Santu Lal Sonkar, resident of Sonkar Plaza, Gole Bazar, Shivaji Ward, Mungeli, Revenue Distt. Mungeli, Revenue Distt. Mungeli (C.G.) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Department of Revenue, New Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.)

2. The Collector ( Land Record) Mungeli, Distt. Mungeli (C.G.)

3. Additional Collector, Mungeli, Distt. Mungeli (C.G.)

4. Deputy Collector-Cum- President, Patwari Selection Committee, Mungeli, Distt. Mungeli (C.G.)

5. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Mungeli, Member of the Patwari Selection Committee, Mungeli Distt. Mungeli (C.G.)

6. District Employment Officer, Member of Patwari Selection Committee, Mungeli, Distt. Mungeli (C.G.)

7. District Education Officer, Member, Patwari Selection Committee, Mungeli, Distt. Mungeli (C.G.)

8. Superintendent (Land Record), Mungeli, Secretary, Patwari Selection Committee, Mungeli, Distt. Mungeli (C.G.) ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri N.L. Soni, Advocate.

For Respondents : Smt. Astha Shukla, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board /0 2 /2016 Heard.

(1) Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner against rejection of his candidature for appointment to the post of Patwari. Earlier, the writ petition bearing W.P. (S) 5276/2014 had been filed by the petitioner for the above-said relief, which was dismissed by this Court in W.P. (S) No.5276/2014 decided on 08.12.2014. Now, again writ petition has been filed stating that he was eligible for appointment on the post of Patwari on the basis of some more documents which the petitioner received now after dismissal of one writ petition. The petitioner cannot be permitted to maintain another writ petition on same cause of action. Case of the petitioner is covered by principle of constructive res judicata, and thus, in the opinion of this Court, instant writ petition is not maintainable for the same cause of action.

(2) Accordingly, the writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge D/-