Abhijeet Kumar Bhakt v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 4794 of 2017 Abhijeet Kumar Bhakt S/o Shri Sapan Kumar Bhakt, Aged About 33 Years Working As Pharmacist Homeopathy Govt. Homeopathic Dispensary, Kanker, District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh.
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Health & Family Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Police Station Rakhi, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.
2. The Director, Ayurved Yoga & Natural Medicine Unani, Siddh & Homeopathy ( A Y U S H ) Chhattisgarh, Indravati Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur Chhattisgarh.
3. The District Ayurved Officer, Kanker, District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh. - Respondents For Petitioner :
Shri Harish Khuntiya, Advocate For Respondent/State :
Shri Chandresh Shrivastava, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 13/09/2017 Heard.
1.
The petitioner's grievance is on account of non-regularization of his services though it has already been granted to similarly situated employee. 2.
At this stage, Shri Shrivastava, learned State counsel submits that at the time when the petitioner's case was considered, presumably, he was not qualified. Therefore, he was not given regular appointment along with employees, who were appointed along with the petitioner. He submits that if the petitioner has now acquired a certificate in Homeopathy Dispensing Course, his case would be examined by the competent authority and appropriate decision would be taken. 3.
In view of the statement so made, I am not inclined to keep this matter pending
and the petition is disposed off with the direction to respondent No.2 to consider petitioner's claim in the light of he having acquired necessary certificate as stated by her and decision be taken within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. If the grievance of the petitioner is not redressed, he would be at liberty to revive this petition. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. It would be open for the authority to decide the matter in accordance with law.
SD/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) J U D G E Tumane