Neelesh Bagde v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3974 of 2021

1. Neelesh Bagde S/o Late Shri Gopal Prasad Bagde Aged About 37 Years Working As Pump Assistant, Municipal Corporation Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh

2. Vinod Kumar Verma S/o Late Dwarika Prasad Verma Aged About 37 Years Working As Pump Assistant Municipal Corporation Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Urban Administration And Development Department Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nava Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Director Urban Administration And Development Department Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nava Raipur, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. Municipal Corporation Bhilai Through The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Bhilai District Durg Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Vikas Dubey, Advocate.

For State/Res.No.1 & 2 :

Ms. Akansha Jain, Dy. GA For Res. No.3 :

Mr. V. K. Agrawal, on behalf of Mr. Sudeep Agrawal, Advocates Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 02/08/2021

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the limited relief sought for in the present writ petition is for appropriate direction to the respondent no.3 for considering and deciding the representation Annexure P-6 dated 01.06.2021 preferred by the petitioner.

-22. The representation of the petitioner is for seeking absorption in any other post which has channel of promotion other than the post of Pump Assistant which does not have further channel of promotion.

3. According to the petitioner, the State Government in the past vide Annexure P-4 dated 05.10.2018 has granted similar benefits so far as similarly placed employees under the Municipal Corporation, Rajnandgaon are concerned. Keeping that in view the petitioners have also approached the respondents for appropriate relief of similar nature.

4. Mr. V. K. Agrawal appearing under the instructions of Mr. Sudeep Agrawal for respondent no.3 submits that to the limited extent for considering the representation on its own merits the counsel does not have any objection.

5. Given the said submissions by the counsel for the parties, the writ petition at this juncture stands disposed of directing the respondent no.3 to take appropriate decision on the representation Annexure P-6 dated 01.06.2021 preferred by the petitioner on its own merits in accordance with law at the earliest preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

6.

With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit