Smt. Mallika Rai v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO.4464 OF 2019 Smt. Mallika Rai W/o Sudeep Mukharjee Aged About 33 Years Lecturer Panchayat, R/o House No. 382, FCI Colony, Changora Bhata, Bazar Chowk, Near Vijay Chowk, Raipur, Tehsil and District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

...Petitioner(s)

Versus

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

2. Chief Executive Office Zila Panchayat Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

... Respondent(s) For Petitioner :

Shri Keshav Prasad Gupta, Advocate.

For Respondent-State :

Ms. Smita Jha, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 21.06.2019 1.

The limited grievance which the petitioner has raised in the present writ petition is for grant of salary and other benefits for the intervening period between 01.06.2016 to 10.10.2017. 2.

Brief facts of the case is that, the petitioner was working as Lecturer (Panchayat) at Ambikapur. Vide order dated 28.05.2016 the petitioner was transferred from Ambikapur to Raipur. Though the petitioner was relieved from Ambikapur and she gave joining on 01.06.2016 at Raipur, she was denied joining by the authorities at Raipur. The petitioner, in between, filed a couple of writ petition and finally a contempt petition was also filed against the concerned officers and ultimately the petitioner was granted joining at Raipur itself on 11.10.2017 and since then she is working at Raipur itself. 3.

The grievance now raised by the petitioner is that, the petitioner has not been granted salary and other benefits for the intervening period

between 01.06.2016 i.e. she gave her joining at Raipur and 11.10.2017 i.e. date she was formally allowed joining by the authorities at Raipur at the instance of the order of this court. 4.

Perusal of records would show that the petitioner has not filed any representation to the authorities concerned in this regard and if at all if she has filed, the copy of the same has not been annexed with the writ petition.

5.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file a detailed representation in this regard to the respondent No.2 within a period of 15 days from today and the respondent No.2 in turn shall within a further period of three months from the date of receipt of representation shall decide the same objectively taking into the consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case.

6.

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