← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/4750/2016disposed off

Suresh Kumar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2016-11-24Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal2 pages

sNAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No.4750 of 2016 Suresh Kumar, aged about 27 years, S/o Shri Kalyan Singh, Cook at Pre Matric Tribal Balak Hostel, Khongsara, Tahsil & P.S. Pendra, District Bilaspur (CG).

---- Petitioner

Versus

1.

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Tribal Welfare Development, Mantralaya Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Police Station Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2.

Commissioner, Department Of Tribal Welfare And Development, Raipur Police Station Civil Lines Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3.

Assistant Commissioner, Department Of Tribal Welfare And Development, Raipur Police Station Civil Lines Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 4.

Collector, (Department Of Tribal Welfare And Development), Police Station Civil Lines, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 5.

Block Education Officer, Block Pendra, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioners : Shri Ashok Kumar Swarnakar, Advocate.

For State : Shri Gary Mukhopadhyay, Dy.G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 24/11/2016 (1) At the very outset, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that he do not want to press any other relief and confine his prayer to the extent that the respondents may be directed to scrutinize the case of the petitioners in accordance with the instructions issued vide memo dated 07.03.2012.

(2) Learned counsel appearing for the State/respondents submits that the case of petitioner will be scrutinized in accordance with the prevailing circular dated 07.03.2012 and if he is found fit and fulfills his criteria laid down in circular dated 07.03.2012, appropriate order thereafter, for his continuation of services, will be passed in accordance with law. (3) In view of the above submission made by learned State counsel, according to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, nothing survives in this petition. (4) Accordingly, the writ petitions stands disposed of. No order as to costs.

(5) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the respondent authorities may decide the same on its own merits.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) L/- Judge