Vijay Narayan Tiwari v. State Of Chhattisgarh,

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 4395 of 2021 Vijay Narayan Tiwari S/o Shri K. L. Tiwari, Aged About 59 Years Working As Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Lohandiguda, District - Bastar, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Scheduled Caste And Scheduled Tribe Development Department, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Joint Secretary, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Scheduled Caste And Scheduled Tribe Development Department, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. The Collector, Jagdalpur, District - Bastar, Chhattisgarh

4. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Bastar, Jagdalpur, District - Bastar, Chhattisgarh

5. G. L. Churendra, Working As Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Mohla, District - Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate For State :

Ms. Akanksha Jain, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 23.08.2021

1. The petitioner in the present writ petition seems to be aggrieved of the order dated 07.08.2021 Annexure P-1 whereby the respondent no.5 has been ordered to be posted as Chief Executive Officer of Janpad Panchayat, Lohandiguda, District Bastar.

2. According to the petitioner, it is he who is substantively posted as the Chief Executive Officer of Janpad Panchayat, Lohandiguda, District Bastar by an order of the State Govt. dated 11.12.2019. According to petitioner, vide impugned order Annexure P-1 there is no change of posting of petitioner whereas respondent no.5 now has been ordered to be posted against the post which the petitioner is substantively holding. According to petitioner, even till date it is he who is discharging the duties of Chief Executive Officer of Janpad Panchayat, Lohandiguda and if the impugned order Annexure P-1 is executed, the petitioner would be left with no assignment or a proper place of posting.

3. At this juncture, learned counsel for State submits that let the petitioner make an appropriate representation to the respondent no.2 who in turn shall duly scrutinize the same and try to redress the grievance of petitioner at the earliest preferably within a period of 30 days from the date the petitioner represents the respondent no.2. The petitioner is directed to represent the respondent no.2, in addition to the representation that he had made in past, within a period of 7 days from today.

4. Meanwhile, purely as an interim measure, let status quo as it exits today, so far as the posting of petitioner is concerned, be maintained till the respondent no.2 takes a decision on the representation of petitioner.

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