Sudhir Sharma v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4490 of 2018 Sudhir Sharma S/o Shri Deepak Kumar Sharma, aged about 35 years, R/o Monsi Ismail Ward, Bhatapara, Occupation Driver, at District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara (C.G.).

- ---Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Co-operative Societies, - Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.).

2. The Registrar Co-operative Societies, C.G., Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.).

3. The Chief Executive Officer, District Co-operative Agriculture & Rural Development Bank Ltd. Raipur (C.G.).

4. The Chief Executive Officer, District Co-operative Central Bank Ltd., Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.).

---Respondents For petitioner :

Shri Sandeep Dubey, Advocate.

For respondents No.1 & 2 :

Shri Syed Majid Ali, Dy.G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 11/07/2018 1.

The limited prayer made by the petitioner in the instant Writ Petition is for issuance of direction to the respondent No.2 to take a decision on the recommendation made by the respondent No.3 as well as the respondent No.4 in respect of absorbing services of the petitioner with the respondent No.4 Bank.

- 2.

The facts of the case in brief is that, the petitioner was initially an employee under the respondent No.3 Bank which subsequently got - merged with the respondent No.4 Bank. That after the merger, all the other -

employees of the respondent No.3 Bank were absorbed into the services - of the respondent No.4 except for the petitioner. The authorities concerned both from the office of the respondent No.3 as well as the respondent No.4 have recommended the case of the petitioner for absorption, but the respondent No.2 till date have not taken any decision in this regard. 3.

Given the nature of dispute and the limited prayer made by the petitioner, this Court does not intend to keep the Writ Petition pending, rather ends of justice would meet if the Writ Petition is disposed off with a direction to the respondent No.2 to ensure that the recommendation made by the respondent No.3 as well as the respondent No.4 so far as the absorption of the services of the petitioner is concerned is decided at the earliest preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

4.

It shall be the responsibility of the petitioner to apprise the respondent No.2 of the order passed by this Court.

5.

The Writ Petition accordingly stands allowed and disposed off. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Sumit JUDGE