Mahima Dolly Paul v. State Of C.G.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (C) No. 2306 of 2020 Mahima Dolly Paul D/o Late Shri V.H. Paul, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Ward No. 10, Rajendra Nagar, Bilaspur, P.S. And Tahsil Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of C.G. Through Secretary, Agriculture And Bio Technology Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Indira Ganshi Krishi Vishvavidyalaya, Through Registrar, Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishvavidyalaya, Ktishak Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. Director (Education), Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishvavidyalaya, Ktishak Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate For State :

Mr. Vivek Ranjan Tiwari, Dy. A.G.

For Respondents 2 & 3 :

Mr. Shashank Thakur, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 09.11.2020

1. The objection raised by the Registry is overruled for the reason that the issue involved in the present writ petition is not service related dispute.

2. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition seems to be the inaction on the part of the respondents in not permitting the petitioner to complete her M.Sc.(Agriculture) Agronomy course in which the petitioner had took admission in the academic session 2016-17. According to the petitioner, she had passed her first semester

examination of the aforesaid course with an Overall Grade Point Average (OGPA) 8.47 with 84.7%. In the second semester, she had scored 8.63 with 86.3% as an OGPA. When the petitioner was pursuing the aforesaid course, she had applied for the post of Rural Agriculture Development Officer under the Res[pondent State Authorities and she got an appointment vide order dated 19.01.2018 and now she is working on the said post. According to the petitioner, since she has undertaken substantial portion of the course of M.Sc.

(Agriculture) Agronomy except for the submission of thesis report which would enable her in getting the post graduation degree, she has been approaching the respondents for an appropriate permission to undertake the remaining portion of the said course and also to submit her thesis report the permission which has not been granted to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner referring to Annexure P-6 submits that identically placed persons have already been granted permission by the University except for the petitioner who for some reason has not been offered the same.

3. At this juncture, learned counsel for the University submits that true that there were identical placed persons but in respect of those persons, there was an order issued by the Directorate of Agriculture, State of Chhattisgarh dated 30.08.2018. Counsel for the University referred to Annexure P-7 whereby the State Govt. had granted permission to those candidates and based upon which the University has granted permission to those candidates. According to the University, subject to the State authorities granting a similar permission in case of the petitioner, her case would also be considered by the University authorities.

4. Be that as it may, since from the pleadings it is evidently clear that identically placed persons have been granted permission on the order issued by the State Authorities, the present writ petition can also be disposed of directing the petitioner to first approach the Registrar of the University for an appropriate order in this regard and based upon which the petitioner shall also approach the State authorities for a similar relief as has been granted to other similarly placed candidates and on getting such permission from the State authorities, the respondent University shall consider granting of permission to the petitioner for completing her course in the light of the order passed by the State Govt.

5. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of.

6. Needless to mention that considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is expected that either of the respondent authorities shall be taking appropriate decision at the earliest on the petitioner approaching them ensuring that the current academic session is not lost. Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge Khatai