High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/1787/2017disposed off

Kartik Ram Patel v. The Director, Printing And Stationery Department Raipur

2017-07-04Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (C) No.1787 of 2017 Kartik Ram Patel, S/o late Shri Punitram Patel, aged about 64 years, R/o Mana Basti Raipur, District Raipur (CG).

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. The Director, Printing and Stationery Department, Raipur, Indrawati Bhawan, Head of Department Office, Block No.1, 2nd Floor, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (CG).

2. Deputy Director, Govt. Regional Printing and Stationery, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (CG).

3. The Collector, Raipur, District Raipur (CG).

4. Bishat Ram Patel, S/o late Shri Samaru Ram Patel, R/o Mana Basti Raipur, Tahsil and District Raipur (CG). --- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr.Pushpendra Kumar Patel, Advocate For State : Mr.Prasun Bhaduri, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 04/07/2017 (1) Heard.

(2) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner made certain complaint against the respondent No.4 before the respondent authorities, which is still pending for consideration and no action has been taken by the said authorities till this date. He would further submit that the respondent No.4 is working as Peon in the office of Respondent No.2-Deputy Director, Government Regional Printing and Stationery, Rajnandgaon and Respondent No.2 & Respondent No.4, both are related to each other and therefore a

direction may be issued to the respondent authorities to decide the same expeditiously.

(3) Learned counsel appearing for the State would submit that respondent No.2 is already seized of the matter against the respondent No.4 and no direction is required to be issued to the respondent authorities.

(4) I have learned counsel for the parties.

(5) In view of the aforesaid position, I am of the considered opinion, since the respondent No.2 is already seized the matter against the respondent No.4, therefore, I am not inclined to entertain the instant writ petition. Consequently, the instant writ petition is closed. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge L/-