Yamuna Banjara v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO. 4451 OF 2018 Yamuna Banjara W/o Govindram Banjara, Aged About 32 Years R/o Mohra, Village Panchayat, Village Panchayat Taulidih, Tahsil Bilaigarh, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1.

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Women And Child Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2.

The Collector, Baloda Bazar, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara (C.G.) 3.

Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Bilaigarh, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara (C.G.) 4.

Project Officer, Integrated Woman Project Officer, Bilaigarh, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara (C.G.) 5.

District Program Officer, Women And Child Development, Department, Bilaigarh, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara (C.G.) 6.

Seema Paikra D/o Pratap Singh Paikra, R/o Village Mauhadih, Tahsil Bilaigarh, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Suresh Kumar Verma, Advocate.

For Respondent-State :

Mr. Shashank Thakur, Govt. Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 09/07/2018 1.

Challenge in the present writ petition is to the order dated 25.6.2018, Annexure P-1, whereby the Collector on an appeal by Respondent No.6 has cancelled the appointment of the Petitioner as an Anganwadi Worker at Anganwadi Mouhadih under Gram Panchayat Taulidih.

2.

Perusal of the impugned order would show that it is an order passed by the Collector in exercise of appellate powers conferred upon it. The said order is a revisable order and the revision would lie before the concerned Commissioner. The Petitioner it appears has not exhausted the statutory remedy of appeal available under the law and has rushed to the writ Court bypassing the statutory remedy available.

3.

This Court thus is not inclined to entertain the present writ petition in its present form and the same therefore deserves to be disposed of, reserving the right of the Petitioner to immediately prefer an appeal before the concerned Commissioner along with an application for grant of interim relief against the impugned order dated 25.6.2018. On the Petitioner preferring an appeal along with

an interim application, it is expected that the concerned Commissioner shall consider and decide the interim application at the earliest. 4.

Subject to the Petitioner providing a photocopy of the impugned order, certified copy of the impugned order shall be replaced and returned back to the Petitioner by the Registry of this Court.

5.

The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of, with the aforesaid observation.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) /sharad/ Judge