Devkumar Kaushik v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3592 of 2021

1. Devkumar Kaushik S/o Shri Chotku Ram Kaushik Aged About 37 Years Posted As House Master, Government Vision And Hearing Impaired School, Tifra District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Panchayat And Social Welfare Department , Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Director Directorate Of Social Welfare , Indrawati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Superintendent Government Vision And Hearing Impaired School, Tifra District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Basant Dewangan, Advocate.

For State : Shri Jitendra Pali, Dy. A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 14.07.2021 .

1. The petitioner seems to be aggrieved of the inaction on the part of the respondents in not finalizing the disciplinary proceedings which was initiated against the petitioner way back in the year 2011.

2. According to the petitioner, the entire disciplinary proceedings were completed and the Enquiry Officer has also submitted his inquiry report to the respondents No. 2 & 3 as early as in the year 2012. However, thereafter there has been no further progress made on the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner and thereby the petitioner has been put to substantial loss of the service benefits which the petitioner was otherwise entitled for and the petitioner only for this reason is also not being confirmed in service.

-23. The State Counsel on the other hand submits that since a couple of representations in this regard is already pending consideration before the respondent No. 2, an appropriate decision be taken by the authorities concerned at the earliest.

4. Given the said submission by the State Counsel, the writ petition at this juncture is disposed of directing the respondent No. 2 to immediately take an appropriate decision on the disciplinary proceedings that was initiated against the petitioner and which stood concluded in the year 2012. Let an appropriate decision be taken at the earliest on the basis of the findings given by the Enquiry Officer preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Jyotijha