Narendra Kumar Maurya v. Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 3752 of 2021

1. Narendra Kumar Maurya S/o Shri Ramashankar Maurya Aged About 34 Years R/o B-14, Sector-1, Agroha Colony, Raipura, Police Station D. D. Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

---Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited Through The Chairman, Chhattisgarh State Power Companies Limited Danganiya Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. The Chairman-Cum-Disciplinary Authority Chhattisgarh State Power Companies Limited, Danganiya Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. The Executive Director (HR) Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited Raipur Chhattisgarh.

4. The General Manager (HR) Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited Raipur Chhattisgarh.

5. Shri Ananad Tiwari (Enquiry Officer) Executive Director (Departmental Enquiry) Chhattisgarh State Power Holding Company Limited Raipur Chhattisgarh.

---Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Rishi Rahul Soni, Advocate.

For Respondents :

None Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 22.07.2021 .

1. The limited relief sought for by the petitioner in the present writ petition is for an appropriate direction to the respondents to consider for taking an early decision on the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner.

2. The contention of the petitioner is that for the alleged misconduct a charge sheet was issued to the petitioner on 21.10.2015 and thereafter a departmental enquriy was conducted. The enquiry officer prepared his eqnuiry report and submitted the same to the department on 28.03.2019. The petitioner thereafter was served with a copy of enquiry report and his

-2explanation was also sought for vide notice dated 18.06.2019, to which the petitioner has given detailed reply on 02.07.2019. However, thereafter there is no progress and development in the disciplinary proceedings and the petitioner unnecessarily is facing departmental enquiry for a long period of time. Thus, the petitioner has filed this petition seeking appropriate direction to the respondents for an early decision to be taken in the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him.

3. Given the facts that enquiry officer has submitted his enquiry report and the petitioner has been served with a show cause notice along with enquiry report to which the petitioner has already replied as early as on 02.07.2019, this court is of the view that no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping this petition pending. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to immediately consider and conclude the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner in accordance with law at the earliest preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It is the responsibility of the petitioner to apprise the respondents so far as order passed by this court is concerned.

4. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge inder