Bineet Kumar Tiwari v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4485 of 2021 1.
Bineet Kumar Tiwari S/o Govind Prasad Tiwari, Aged About 30 Years R/o Ward No. 02, Odgi, Bawaspara, Baikunthpur, District Korea Chhattisgarh 2.
Rajesh Tiwari S/o Ramashankar Tiwari, Aged About 46 Years R/o Bhattipara, Baikunthpur, District Korea Chhattisgarh 3.
Ramkumar Shyam S/o Bharat Singh Shyam, Aged About 33 Years R/o Block Colony, Ward No. 11, Kachahari Para, Baikunthpur, District Korea Chhattisgarh 4.
Vandana Kindo D/o Harman Kindo, Aged About 28 Years R/o Rampur Colony, Ward, Baikunthpur, District Korea Chhattisgarh 5.
Satendra Kumar S/o Suraj Lal, Aged About 29 Years R/o Ward No. 09, Vidyalaya Para, Madisarai, Tahsil Bharatpur, District Korea Chhattisgarh 6.
Manjulata Singh D/o Kanta Singh, Aged About 30 Years R/o Ward No. 07, Piperpara, Sarbhoka, Nagpur, Tahsil Manendragarh, District Korea Chhattisgarh 7.
Chanda D/o Ramkhilawan Aged About 28 Years R/o Ward No. 08, Chowki Dafai, Tahsil Baikunthpur, District Korea Chhattisgarh 8.
Parmeshwar Singh S/o Shankar Lal Singh Aged About 28 Years R/o Pandrahtoli, Janakpur, District Korea Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners
Versus
1.
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2.
Director, Land Record, Indrawati Bhawan, First Floor, Block No. 2, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3.
Collector, Korea, District Korea Chhattisgarh ----Respondents
For Petitioners :
Mr. Syed Majid Ali, Advocate For State :
Mr. Ayaz Naved, G.A.
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 26/08/2021 1.
The limited grievance of the petitioners in the present writ petition is the non-confirmation of the petitioners after having successfully completed the period of probation.
2.
According to the petitioners, they were all appointed vide order dated 05.10.2018 and that at the time of appointment the services of the petitioners were placed under probation for a period 2 years. The said period of 2 years stands completed in October, 2020. According to the petitioners, meanwhile the petitioners have also cleared all the written examinations required for a Patwari to have passed for being confirmed in the services.
3.
The further contention of the petitioners is that the Department meanwhile have already confirmed the services of many other identically placed persons, who were appointed along with the petitioners, but the claim of the petitioners for some reasons have been left out.
4.
Mr. Syed Majid Ali, Advocate at this juncture submits that the limited prayer that he makes as of now is for an appropriate direction to the respondents No.2 & 3 to consider conforming the services of the petitioner at the earliest at par with the similarly placed persons, who were appointed along with the petitioners, who have been confirmed in service vide Annexure P/5 and other orders of similar nature
confirming the services of similarly placed other personnels. Let the respondent No.2 therefore take an appropriate decision on the claim of the petitioner regarding their confirmation in service keeping in view the confirmation which has been extended to persons, who were appointed along with the petitioners at the earliest preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. 5.
With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed of.
Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved