Dr. Ashok Kumar Jaiswal v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3860 of 2021 Dr. Ashok Kumar Jaiswal S/o Shri Gulab Prasad Jaiswal Aged About 46 Years Presently Posted And Working As Core Faculty Member (Panchayati Raj), Thakur Pyare Lal Institute Of Panchayat And Rural Development (Sird), Nimora, Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

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

2. Director Thankur Pyare Lal Institute Of Panchayat And Rural Development (Sird), Nimora, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Shashank Thakur, Advocate.

For State :

Ms. Sunita Jain, GA Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 28/07/2021

1. The limited relief that petitioner has is for appropriate direction to the respondents to consider his claim for regularizing him in the service of the respondents.

2. According to the petitioner, he has been appointed under the respondents under the Project of State Institute of Rural Development. The appointment of the petitioner has been done as a Core Faculty Member(Panchayati Raj). The nature of appointment was on contract basis. The initial appointment of the petitioner was on 03.07.2009 and which has been further continued annually till date. According to the petitioner, the petitioner at a National Colloquium held in the city of

-2Hyderabad on 12-13.01.2018, it was resolved in the said colloquium that the core faculty members recruited under the scheme and who have put in more than two years of satisfactory service, should be regularized based on some objective screening process. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that similar projects have also been established in all the States in India and so far as the State of Tamil Nadu is concerned, there were two members who were working as a Core Faculty Members at the State Institute of Rural Development, Madras who had approached the High Court of Madras with similar relief and High Court had granted an order in their favour directing the Institute to regularize the service of the petitioner. According to the petitioner the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of Dr. C. Villi Vs. The Director and Others, in WP. No.25636/2005 was also affirmed by the Supreme Court.

3. Further contention of the petitioner is that the service records of the petitioner would show that his service have been outstanding all along from the time of his appointment and he has been representing the State as also India in various national and international conferences and Colloquiums. Therefore, the respondents be directed to consider his claim for being regularized in service as a Core Faculty Member.

4. From the pleadings, it appears that representation of the petitioner is still till date not decided and is pending consideration before the authorities.

5. Given the fact that his representations are still pending consideration, the writ petition at this juncture stands disposed of directing the respondents to consider and decide his representation for regularization, keeping in view the resolution that was resolved at the Colloquium held at Hyderabad and also taking note of the judgment of the Madras High Court passed under the similar, if not, identical factual backdrop.

-36. Let an appropriate decision be taken by the respondents at the earliest preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

7.

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

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit