Dr. Jarj Jiwan Lakda v. State Of Chhattisgrh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4199 of 2019 Dr. Jarj Jiwan Lakda S/o Shri J Lakda Aged About 59 Years Working As Medical Officer, At District Hospita, Jashpur, R/o Shanti Nagar, College Road, Jashpur, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Public Health And Family Welfare, Mantralay, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Civil Surgeon District Hospita, Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh

3. The Chief Medical And Health Officer District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ---Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate For State :

Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, Dy. A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 22/08/2019 1.

The dispute in the instant case is only in respect of the granting of subsistence allowance for the period of suspension between 12.10.2016 to 10.04.2019.

2.

The contention of the petitioner is that he was placed under suspension on account of his being implicated in a criminal case. He further submits that the criminal case has finally resulted in the acquittal of the petitioner. The petitioner submits that meanwhile the petitioner was not granted any subsistence allowance for the period of suspension and the respondents have also not passed an order granting any relief for the said period and has closed the matter after taking the petitioner back in service. He submits that

-2he has already made a representation in this regard to the respondent No.2, which is still pending consideration.

3.

Given the limited grievance and the relief that the petitioner has sought, let the respondent No.2 take a decision on the representation of the petitioner at the earliest preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

4.

It shall be the responsibility of the petitioner to apprise the respondent No.2, so far as the order passed by this Court is concerned. 5.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed off. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved