A. Amin v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO.5214 OF 2019 A. Amin S/o Abdul Samad Sheikh, Aged About 34 Years Presently Working as Information Technology Advisor (Contractual), In Thakur Pyarelal State Institute of Panchayat and Rural Development, Nimora, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

...Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary, Panchayat and Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District- Rapur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Director Thakur Pyarelal State Institute of Panchayat and Rural Development, Nimora, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner :

Shri Shashank Thakur, Advocate.

For Respondent-State :

Ms. Sunita Jain, Govt. Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 17.07.2019 1.

The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner had participated in the recruitment process for the post of faculty member in Information, Education and Communication. The recruitment process were initiated in the year, 2017. The list of candidates were shortlisted and interview also were convened on 18.04.2017, however, the merit list till date has not been finally published by the department.

2.

According to the petitioner, since it is about two years that the petitioner has participated in the selection process but till date neither merit list has been published nor have they issued appointment order in favour of the petitioner or any other persons. The relief sought for by the petitioner is for a direction to the respondent No.2 to take an appropriate decision so far as the recruitment process which was initiated for filling up of the post of faculty member in Information, Education and Communication is concerned.

3.

The relief sought for by the petitioner seems to be fair and reasonable. The petitioner has a right to know whether the respondents intend to proceed further with the recruitment process or not. If they intend, then the results should be declared at the earliest or else the petitioner should be informed of the decision that the respondent No.2 intends to take. 4.

Given the aforesaid facts, let the respondent No.2 take an appropriate decision in this regard within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

5.

It shall the responsibility of the petitioner to apprise the respondent No.2 so far as order passed by this court is concerned. 6.

The writ petitioner accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge inder