← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/853/2017disposed off

Rakesh Kumar Pandey v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-02-20Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO. 853 OF 2017 Rakesh Kumar Pandey, S/o Shri Jhumuklal Pandey, aged about 46 years, posted as Spot Assistant, Public Works Department, Headquarter Sub-Division No.1, Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Public Works Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, P.S. Rakhi, District Raipur (C.G.) 2.

The Engineer-in-Chief, Public Works Department, Sirpur Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3.

The Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur (C.G.) 4.

The Superintending Engineer, Public Works Department, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur (C.G.) 5.

The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Chama Division, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. V.R. Tiwari, Advocate.

For Respondent-State :

Mr. Gary Mukhopadhyay, Dy. Govt.

Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 20/02/2017 1.

The present petition has been filed seeking for release of the balance of amount during the period the Petitioner was placed under suspension. 2.

Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner was placed under suspension on 14.9.2015 and the order of suspension was revoked on 18.4.2016 and the Petitioner since then is working. He further submits that during the period of suspension the Petitioner was granted subsistence allowance, however, by the revocation of the suspension, the period of suspension has not been explained by the authorities and therefore he would be entitled for monetary benefits for the period he was placed under suspension. According to the Counsel for the Petitioner, the Petitioner has also made a representation to Respondent No.4 in this regard.

-23.

Without entering into the merits of the case, the writ petition is being disposed of with a direction that, let the matter be considered by Respondent No.4 particularity on the representation made by the Petitioner and the Respondent No.4 shall decide the same within a period of three months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order. The authorities concerned shall also pass a suitable order, explaining as to how the period of suspension has to be treated.

4.

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