Laxman Kumar Singh v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WP No.1536 of 2006 Munila Singh W/o Late Shri L.K. Singh, Aged about 42 years, R/o Khashipur, Behind Telegraph Office, Ward No.12, Samastipur, Bihar ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary, Food & Civil Supplies Corporation, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (CG)

2. The General Manager (Esthapana) State Food & Civil Supplies Corporation, Raipur (CG)

3. Regional Manager, Food & Civil Supplies Corporation, Raipur (CG)

4. Departmental Investigation Officer, Kshetirya Prabandhak, Bilaspur (CG)

5. District Manager, Food & Civil Supplies Corporation, Regional Office, Raipur, Camp-Jagdalpur (CG) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr.Ashish Surana, Advocate For Respondent No.1 :

Mr.Sangrash Pandey, Dy.G.A.

For Respondents No.2, 3 & 5 :

Mr.V.R.Tiwari, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 29/1/2018

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the original employee has been terminated from service by order dated 5.11.1992 and thereafter in criminal case instituted on the ground of charge of offence under Section 409 of the IPC he was acquitted by order of the criminal Court dated 28.12.1999, therefore, the original employee is entitled to be reinstated and also entitled for consequential service benefits though original employee-Laxman Kumar Singh has died and his wife has been substituted.

2. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents No.2, 3 and 5 would oppose the writ petition.

3. Be that as it may, since the original employee has been acquitted from the charge of offence under Section 409 of the IPC, the petitioner is at liberty to make a fresh representation to

respondent No.2, who shall consider and decide the petitioner's representation as to whether the original employee is entitled for reinstatement and if entitled for reinstatement, she is entitled for consequential benefits within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the representation along with a copy of this order. The petitioner is at liberty to file relevant judgments in support of her representation.

4. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition finally stands disposed off. No cost(s).

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge B/-