Ramlal Tiwari v. Chhattisgarh State Power Transmission Company Limited And Others

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4693 of 2021 Ramlal Tiwari S/o Late Shri Heeralal Tiwari Aged About 55 Years R/o Quarter No. Of/06, C.S.E.B. Colony, Geedam Road, Jagdalpur, District Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Chhattisgarh State Power Transmission Company Limited And Others Through Managing Director Campus Of Chhattisgarh State Power Companies, Dangania, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Superintendent Engineer (Civil) Circle Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh State Power Transmission Company Limited, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh.

3. Executive Engineer (Civil) Transmission Division, Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh State Power Transmission Company Limited, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. S. P. Kale, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 07/09/2021

1. The relief sought for in the present writ petition is for appropriate direction to the respondents to accept the father's name of the petitioner as Heeralal Tiwari and Heeraman Tiwari to be the same.

2. According to the petitioner his father's name mentioned in fact is Heeralal. He is also called as Heeraman and therefore because of the clerical error at some places the father's name is reflected as Heeralal and at some places it is reflected as Heeraman Tiwari. Further contention of the petitioner is that on account of the said discrepancy, the respondent

-2authorities are not issuing any monetary reliefs to the petitioner which he is otherwise entitled for. The petitioner also submits that there is no allegation against the petitioner of having played mischief or fraud in the course of declaring his father's name or for the purpose of getting the employment.

3. The petitioner had approached the Civil Court at Satna Madhya Pradesh for the same relief, but the same got rejected on the ground of territorial jurisdiction.

4. All said and done, the relief sought for is the one which could had been issued only by a competent Court have jurisdiction where the evidence would have to be led by the petitioner to establish that both Heeralal and Heeraman are one and the same person called by two names and is the father of the petitioner. Thereafter, the same can be produced before the respondent authorities for a suitable further action.

5. Meanwhile, since the petitioner is discharging his duties and he is entitled for all the salary, perks and other benefits attached to the post to which the petitioner is working and since there is no charge sheet or any disciplinary proceeding pending against the petitioner, the respondent authorities are expected to take appropriate suitable decision on the said claim of the petitioner. The writ petition therefore accordingly stands disposed of for the respondent authorities to take suitable appropriate steps in this regard at the earliest.

6.

With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit