Manoj Kumar Jangde v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 5815 of 2019 Manoj Kumar Jangde S/o Shri Aatma Ram Jangde, Aged About 27 Years, Terminated From Post Of Peon Worked In District Industrial Commercial Center Durg, District- Durg, R/o Village- Rakhi (Zoba), Post- Devkar, Tahsil- Saja, District- Bemetara, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Commercial And Industrial, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Director, Directorate Of Commercial And Industrial Department, Chhattisgarh Udhyog Bhawan, Ring Road No. 01, Raipur, DistrictRaipur, Chhattisgarh

3. The General Manager, District Commercial And Industrial Center, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

4. The General Manager, District Commercial And Industrial Center, Durg, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. J. N. Nande, Advocate For State :

Ms. Akanksha Jain, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 06.08.2019

1. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order Annexure P-1 & P-2 dated 06.01.2015 & 12.01.2015 respectively.

2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner got an appointment under the respondents on 03.10.2013 on the post of Peon. Subsequently, it has been learnt that the petitioner obtained fraudulent and fake documents for getting employment. On the basis of the complaint, an FIR was lodged and a criminal case was registered against the petitioner which is still pending before the JMFC, Raipur. Based on that the services of the petitioner stood terminated vide Annexure P-1 & P-2.

3. The two orders under challenge had been passed more than 4 1⁄2 years back and during this period, the petitioner did not think it proper to challenge the same as according to the petitioner he was pursuing his criminal case.

4. Given the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the fact that the allegation against the petitioner is that of obtaining employment by using fake and fraudulent documents and a criminal case in this regard is already pending, the question of directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner at this juncture does not arise.

5. The writ petition therefore stands disposed of reserving the right of the petitioner to approach the competent authority in the department or the Court, if required, subject to the outcome of the criminal case which is pending against the petitioner before the JMFC, Raipur. Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge Khatai